On 15-Nov-09, at 8:46 AM, David T. Lewis wrote:
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 05:03:11PM +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 15.11.2009, at 16:48, David T. Lewis wrote:
There is currently a package dependency for VMMaker that requires the entire Speech package (for KlattSynthesizerPlugin). This can be resolved through a minor refactoring of Speech, mainly to move the shared pool class KlattResonatorIndices into a separate package, e.g. "SharedPool-Speech".
Are there any objections to adopting the package name "SharedPool- Speech" for this? By implication, we might also have "SharedPool-FFI" and so forth.
Wouldn't it make more sense to have packages named "Speech-Shared" and "Speech-Plugin" containing the shared pool and the plugin, respectively? That would go along well with the 8 or so other Speech categories.
That would be a good logical organization, but doesn't that require splitting the existing Speech package into a total of 9 or 10 categories?
To elaborate a bit, it's not a good idea to have overlapping packages in Monticello 1.x. So if there's a package named "Speech-Shared", there should not be a package named "Speech." That would imply that the other categories "Speech-*" are all separate packages. That's probably not what we want.
David, "SharedPool-Speech" sounds good to me.
Colin