Yes, you are right. I'd like to have the solution before the problem arises. It's not a solution looking for a problem, its a solution to avoid the problem.
If I understood you reasoning you wanted to make name management of major parts of the tree a "global activity", and to reduce noise for everyone letting users put modules effortlessly in a subtree.
I want to have management of the core parts of the tree as a collective activity for the core developers and reducing noise by outsourcing management of subtrees with much activity/developer interest. This would hopefully bring committers closer to code managers that knows and cares about the application area at hand.
/ Martin Nilsson (Åskblod)
Previous text:
2003-01-26 19:57: Subject: Re: Bz2
No, I tried to describe the problem at hand to begin with. And no, I don't see the need to delegate namespace administration as a problem at hand; we're not anywhere near such a large community yet. Thus my impression that it was more like a solution seeking a problem.
What's necessary is only a registrar for names. IDA doesn't have to provide hosting although it could be nice to offer that for interesting projects.
I don't think it is a good idea to create a playground-module namespace, because stuff that gets in there will most likely stick.
How does namespace delegation affect this? I understand that hosting will affect it, or more specifically, what gets included in the standard dists. I didn't touch that issue either.
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS