Tim Bunce wrote:
>  How does your MySQL::Packet module compare with Net::MySQL
>  (http://search.cpan.org/~oyama/Net-MySQL/MySQL.pm)

mine is more low-level and purely functional.  it leaves all the socket
details and protocol logic to you.  all it does is parse binary packets
into hashes or build them from supplied arguments.

i try to mirror the logical structure of the packets in the perl code
rather than hiding it.

the intent is to aid the writing of general-purpose mysql modules having
interfaces appropriate to the end user.

i am not sure whether this should be under the Net:: namespace.

> > however this has nothing to do with the real DBI/DBD so maybe the name
> > should be different.
>  
>  Yes, please do, as it is misleading currently.

okay.

>  Will you be releasing to cpan soon?

yes, i am looking into the procedures for that.

>  As for naming, considering the low-level of the events, I suggest:
>  
>  	POE::Component::MySQL::Protocol
>  
>  which then leaves room for other, higher level, modules in the
>  POE::Component::MySQL::* namespace.

well, i think the architecture is essentially repeatable for other dbs
(i was thinking of trying postgresql next).  if it isn't, then it should
be, and the mysql module should conform to the more general pattern.  so
to me, that recommends POE::Component::_something_::MySQL

perhaps just POE::Component::Client::MySQL?
POE::Component::Client::DB::MySQL?  POE::Component::DB::Driver::MySQL?

rocco suggested POE::Component::DB::MySQL.

whatever it is, i think it should leave a clear spot for other
driver-specific components and the hypothetical driver-independent
component.

-tavin