I sadly have not had enough time to work on cpan-mp, I've been mostly learning the internals of macports first. But yeah, like I said on that other thread, the latest perl is enough. Back when 5.x stalled because everyone thought 6 was coming out it was ok to stay still. But now we get new Perls regularly.
—Mark _______________________ Mark E. Anderson <e...@emer.net> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Mojca Miklavec <mo...@macports.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote: > > On Jun 10, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote: > >> > >> I would be really grateful if someone would be > >> willing to look into the above mentioned ticket. We would need a > >> slight modification of the configure/build scripts. > > > > That change seems reasonable to me, but it would be worthwhile to look > at what other packaging systems do (and/or to follow ryan's advice and talk > to the perl devs about it) > > A while back I asked on stackoverflow and got a suggestion to install > perlbrew. > > ( > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23270656/how-to-install-perl-without-sub-version-number-in-path-lib-perl5-5-x-y-lib > ) > > But yes, we should ask that. (I nevertheless made a change in perl > 5.20 to see how it works.) > > >> Other questions are still open. (One of the "complaints" about the > >> current situation [ignoring the situation itself] is that if I go > >> ahead and start modifying maintained p5-foo ports, maintainers will > >> start complaining. > > > > I don't see that as a 'problem' (more works as intended) - you shouldn't > make changes to a port someone else maintains without communicating with > them (unless the port is 'broken'). > > Yes, I understand that. But in the context of perl ports this *is* a > problem. The only reasonable solution would be to open a ticket, CC > all maintainers of all thousand perl packages, ask them to fix/upgrade > their ports in the next 3-10 days (or argue why the ports shouldn't be > changed), and that all other ports could be changed based on > maintainer timeout at any time. Opening thousand tickets just to > request an update seems like an overkill. > > (But yes, something needs to be done to facilitate automatic upgrades, > at least for ports where no special treatment is needed.) > > > either we get the maintainers to update their ports, add openmaintainer, > or we follow the port abandonment procedure and get the port updated to > nomaintainer. > > Or that. > > > maybe eventually get some level 'automatic' support of modules from CPAN > without having to write/update portfiles for each module when most of them > will 'just work'?) > > Yes, that would be ideal. It just needs work. > > Btw: Perl 5.16 is no longer supported. > > Mojca > _______________________________________________ > macports-dev mailing list > macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev >
_______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev