Alexis Sukrieh wrote: > So the question is: must we _always_ apply the Perl policy for naming > packages, or can we bypass that policy when the name becomes rdeundant > like here? A while ago I suggested allowing perl module packages to be named other than as the policy requires, as long as they also provided the name required by the policy. This never happened, but I still think it's a good idea for cases like this one. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature