On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Kate L Pugh wrote: > Shevek wrote: > >> Surely identifying the dependencies of any one module is incomputable in > >> general, and most likely incomputable in the specific cases of many > >> popular modules, especially those with baroque plugin architectures. > > On Mon 08 Sep 2003, Rafael Garcia-Suarez > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Of course that depends on whether you want to compute the dependencies > > yourself, or if you rely on metadata such as the Makefile.PLs and > > the META.yml files. > > Well, I was planning to rely on Module::CPANTS. I'd prefer an extant > imperfect solution to an unimplementable perfect solution, or no solution.
It is my general impression of CPAN (and much of the open source world) that there are a great number of solutions to each and every easy problem, and frequently no solution to the harder problems. However... I like the suggestion later in this thread about having a standard way of specifying "optional" modules. I think that such a feature could benefit from considerable architecture support, and would make Makefile.PL (or whatever equivalent) more reliable than some of the home-grown efforts flying around. S. -- Shevek http://www.anarres.org/ I am the Borg. http://www.gothnicity.org/
