> > That's great. I suppose we ought to be able to #define > > USE_OPENBEOS_NAMESPACE now as well, correct? Cool. > The other day I read on the IK Team list, that in order to prepare the > move to the new directory structure/build system the OpenBeOS name space > shall be removed. Wait a second... there it is: > //www.freelists.org/archives/interfacekit/04-2002/msg00007.html > Mmh??? I personally don't see that leaving it in there causes any harm whatsoever. The powers that be don't want an OpenBeOS namespace used -- why? The best I can tell is they don't see it as necessary, which is true from the perspective that you'll only be using BeOS R5 *or* OpenBeOS R1 at any given time, never both at once. But if we ever want to write up binary compatibility tests that *do* use both at the same time (which I kind of think would be cool), the only way to do it is to wrap one of the versions in a namespace. We could change it to StorageKit or something else if they don't want end-users to be potentially confused by the presence of "namespace OpenBeOS" wrapped up in #IFDEFs, but other than that I don't see that leaving it in is any sort of liability. -Tyler