Re: [Webware-discuss] MiscUtils and WebUtils name

[Chuck E. <Chu...@ya...>]

At 01:13 PM 11/2/2001 -0800, Mike Orr wrote:
>How about WWMiscUtils & WWWebUtils, or ChuckMiscUtils & ChuckWebUtils,
>or ceMiscUtils & ceWebUtils (using Chuck's initials)?  Those names are
>much less generic, thus making others feel better about giving Chuck
>"ownership" of those prefixes.

There's no way we're injecting my name into software components. I _like_ 
having a team of developers, patch contributors, users, etc. and not all 
software in those packages comes from me. I also strive to make Webware 
manageable without me, for example, documenting my release procedures and 
the style guidelines.

I would also consider future packages like DBUtils if there is enough 
material to warrant them. I still don't think *Utils is out there, 
especially with a cap U. I chose it, in part, because I really hadn't seen 
it, which is also why I avoided *lib, not to mention those are usually 
modules, not packages.


-Chuck