[Framework-Team] Re: Names, names and we need a decision

[Daniel Nouri]

Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> Daniel Nouri wrote:
>> Do you agree that we put the documentation in the top-level directory? 
>> I.e. INSTALL.txt, README.txt etc.  They shouldn't really go *inside* 
>> the package I hear from Ian.  Would also give us less duplication 
>> between the plone_app and the plone_core (should we rename?) templates.
>>
>> I think that for distribution (project) names we should use names like 
>> "PloneExample", rather than "plone.example".
> 
> We can put the docs at the top level. I just put them inside the package 
> as we always did it this way, but after thinking about it, this was only 
> because we had no other choice ;)

:-)

> The name plone_core is misleading now indeed. We could rename it to 
> either just plone or plone_base. I think plone_app is fine.

+1 for just plone

> For distribution names I'm against using upper- or CamelCase names. 
> While it is not technically a Python module, it is of a folderish nature 
> and thus should use all lowercase names.
> 
> Besides using these lowercase names is already practiced by the Zope 
> people in general. Look at http://svn.zope.org for things like 
> 'zope.interface', 'zc.recipe.filestorage', ...
> 
> I fear having a different naming convention for distributions would 
> confuse people more than it would help.

The problem here is that Zope 3 is not following the convention...  I'm 
not sure if that's a good enough reason for us to do the same.


Daniel