Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <ava...@gmail.com> writes: > We'll also redundantly trigger if you upgrade to a minor new perl > version, but I think that's squarely in "who cares" territory. > ... > But I think overall leaning on the side of busting the cache more > often to avoid cryptic errors is the right choice, and we should use > "perl -V".
I'd throw it into "better safe than sorry" category. I think we all like the approach this patch takes. Let's queue it and merge it down soonish. Thanks.
