Received: from mx0.gmx.net (mx0.gmx.net [213.165.64.100]) by h1439878.stratoserver.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with SMTP id q8PJomkt024493 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:50:49 +0200 Received: (qmail 23088 invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2012 19:50:43 -0000 Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Sep 2012 19:50:42 -0000 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.100.212] by mx0.gmx.net (mx076) with SMTP; 25 Sep 2012 21:50:42 +0200 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q8PJm0F9008919 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:48:00 +0200 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [127.0.0.1]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q8PGG9u4010144; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:47:59 +0200 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with spool id 3416770 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:47:59 +0200 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.1) with ESMTP id q8PJlxNV011093 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:47:59 +0200 Received: from smtp.demon.co.uk (mdfmta005.mxout.tch.inty.net [91.221.169.46]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q8PJljpD031346 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 21:47:47 +0200 Received: from mdfmta005.tch.inty.net (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mdfmta005.tch.inty.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70EEA18C3DA for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:47:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from mdfmta005.tch.inty.net (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mdfmta005.tch.inty.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 476E718C3D9 for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:47:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from palladium.local (unknown [81.149.193.95]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mdfmta005.tch.inty.net (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:47:43 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <504FAAC6.8000605@morningstar2.co.uk> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MDF-HostID: 18 Message-ID: <50620A53.4030600@morningstar2.co.uk> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 20:47:31 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Joseph Wright Subject: Re: Managing/tracking module prefixes To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de In-Reply-To: <504FAAC6.8000605@morningstar2.co.uk> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Sender is in whitelist: joseph.wright@MORNINGSTAR2.CO.UK); Detail=5D7Q89H36p4L00VTXC6D4q0N+AH0PUCnBi0P5cROEGjO+pG7NAH/K+tf9SrVFtpLrKONl 2T9EL4W4U4jgzLbnCcGpk1z/zwmKT/K1fv3lD0=V1; X-Resent-By: Forwarder X-Resent-For: rainer.schoepf@gmx.net X-Resent-To: rainer@rainer-schoepf.de Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 7154 On 11/09/2012 22:19, Joseph Wright wrote: > Hello all, > > Take up of expl3 as a programming language raises new issues both in the > code itself and in the wider structures. > > One area which deserves attention is namespacing: management of module > prefixes (and related information). In LaTeX2e, this is handled in a > broadly successful but somewhat ad hoc manner, relying on searching over > released material to find what prefixes are in use. As expl3 formalises > the idea of using a namespace prefix for each module, it seems > appropriate to consider a more formal approach to managing these. > > Looking outside of the TeX world, it is notable that similar concerns > come up for example in the Perl community: > http://www.cpan.org/modules/04pause.html#namespace. Clearly, our > requirements are different as expl3 code is a subset of (La)TeX code, > and so management at the CTAN level is inappropriate. > > I think we can see namespace management in two parts: > - 'Outside LaTeX': having a system available for consultation > before any code is written. > - 'Inside LaTeX': making module information available from within a > TeX run. > > At this stage, I want to focus on the 'outside' part of the question. > There are many approaches that one can imagine, varying from the very > simple to the very complex. An approach I'd like to raise here is at the > low-tech end of the spectrum. I envisage a simple list of module > prefixes with associated information: the module name, developer(s), > contact details, web site, bug tracker, etc. This would be available in > public (CTAN/LaTeX3 SVN), but updates would rely on a simple process: > contacting the team and making a request. This could then be made more > 'high tech' in the future if necessary. > > An 'open' list of prefixes offers advantages, for example begin able to > 'reserve' prefixes in advance of code release (for the team) and making > clear that some prefixes are 'free for all' (perhaps "tmp" and "foo", > for example). At the same time, there will be some issues, for example > how to handle conflicts and how to make sure information remains up to date. > > Clearly, any such approach requires agreement within the expl3 developer > community. Thus what I am seeking here is in the first instance feedback > on this idea. Does this seem sensible, workable and useful? > -- > Joseph Wright I note a lack of objections, so at least a tacit sense that this may be a good idea :-) That being the case, the immediate questions are what to have in such a register and how to make contact to have material added. On the details, things which come to mind are - Prefix itself! - Contact details: I guess a publicly-recordable e-mail address is a must, plus a person or group name - Module name (may be different from the prefix) - Homepage for project - Issue database/code repo locations I think 'incoming details' probably need to go to some archived list, which means either here or the team e-mail address. To avoid spamming too many people, I guess the latter might be preferable. Does this make sense? -- Joseph Wright