> Stephane, as i said before, i do not see problems with RPackage / naming.
> These things are orthogonal, as to me.
> We can keep naming scheme as we use today, but switch to RPackage.
>
> A package can keep the list of category names and that's it. They
> could even be completely different, if people want it.
> Say, package is named
> Foo
> and contain categories:
> 'Foo-Core'
> 'Bar'
>
> The rationale is simple:
> it is up to human(s) to decide what a package should contain, and what
> names to use. Let's just embrace the imperfection and do not dictate
> people
> how they should name their categories in order to make sure that
> classes in that categories will be put into concrete package.
> If people like to confuse themselves with category names, not matching
> the package name , it should be their own choice and responsibility.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko.
>