-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

=pod

I've been addicted to L<Weewar|http://weewar.com/?referrer=jrockway>
lately, and I decided to write some Perl bindings for its API last
night.  They're on the CPAN under the top-level Weewar namespace.

Normally I wouldn't put stuff in the top-level namespace, but Schwern
suggested it, and frankly, it's a good idea.  

Is anyone else really going to put anything in there?  Unlikely.

Right now the CPAN has site APIs in a myriad of categories.  C<Net::>,
C<WWW::>, C<API::>, C<Web::>, and C<Webservice::>, just to name a few.
There's no consistiency, and there's no namespace that only contains
web services; plenty of other things are in C<Net::> (C<Net::DNS>) and
C<WWW::> (C<WWW::Mechanize>).  So really, I don't feel bad about putting
it in the top-level.  It won't confuse anyone any more or any less
than putting it somewhere else.

Anyway, what prompted this post is that I got some hate mail from an
anonymous remailer for the use of this namespace.  I don't understand
the point of being anonymous -- I'm not going to get mad at you for
telling me my naming choice sucks.  Welcome to being a CPAN author.

Color me amused.

=cut
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBRu4UlNAZeFPdJeQvAQJjUAQAkaCSiB4+8CRw6w4TNnHBQTEcDtYxXhiA
DAipDvax0q77PlOTngi/SEF7ul7cmAeHxKgUhFfYtudka+llAXQ1REa0+6wlfLJC
1WZ8Ctq4WkuAuK9qvpvIQqvMoyrIEjG223RkOx2+M8JhREf8z5kYdtlcpPOBOtJv
PasbFAyrak4=
=5v7v
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----