Hello everyone,
after launching the PTurtle library, Andreas and I have been discussing library names and considering the merits of there being a dedicated Processing suffix (perhaps P, P5 or Pro) available for Processing libraries.
You can read our full posts in the PTurtle thread, also in the libraries and tool development forum. Here are the relevant parts of our our conversation so far:
Quote:Andreas "i am just worried, that the naming does conflict with the convention of using prefix P only for "official" things that are inside processing.core and other associated classes. but chaning the name of pturtle would then also affect your current sourceforge url. any suggestions?"
Quote:Ollie "We came across the library naming rules after registering the SourceForge project and decided to use PTurtle for the time being while we got our first release out.
We're aware it's problematic; we'd like to indicate that our library is for use with Processing, but all of the desirable suffixes, P, P5 and Pro, are reserved. Indeed, without modification, the library won't work with anything else, making JTurtle or something more generic undesirable. I imagine that a number of developers have had this difficulty and I can see there are several Pro- and P5- libraries on the library page.
Could I suggest a long term, mutually beneficial solution? How about dedicating one of the "p" suffixes to third party library developers, say P5? With such a nomination, we could all enjoy library names that reference Processing without encroaching on the official, core API namespace.
How does this sound to you?"
Quote:Andreas "ironically 2 of my libraries do fall under the suffix-issue as well. for libraries i am working on now, i decided to use an 's' as prefix - giving up the P5 suffix. doing so, my future libs might be less connected to processing in its naming convention but more connected towards the author. i do see that it might be useful to have a dedicated prefix or suffix that makes it easier to identify processing libraries, yet i dont know if it should be a requirement - but an option. what do others think? (maybe this should continue in its own thread?)"
What do other developers think? Do you agree that a suffix would be useful? What would you prefer it to be, and why?
Best wishes,
Ollie
Pages: 1
A dedicated suffix for Processing libraries? (Read 909 times)