On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Jimi Thompson wrote:
> Matt,
>
> Everything required to make the module work ought to be included in
> the package or at least cross referenced to it. I have been having a
> problem in which I have had to manually resolve module dependencies on
> a Solaris 2.6 box. It went through several layers with several
> candidates for each layer. It's taken me a couple of months to get
> here.
>
> If you want corporate america to buy in to Perl, which seems to be the
> general gist of this thread, and not to loose any of the freedom you
> have in coding Perl, then you are going to have to find a way to make
> Perl easier to use. If it stays this hard, most employers are not
> going to let their precious IT staff devote time and energy to doing
> things in Perl that they can buy off the shelf elsewhere.
>
> It's really been an ugly process. My suggestion, I think that CPAN
> could make things a whole lot easier by simply asking the folks who
> wrote the module to link to the things it's dependent on. I also
> think that CPAN could make a good many folks lives easier by listing
> system requirements, when known.
>
> My point is that if things have been this bad for me, an end user (Joe
> Small Business Owner) would have given long ago and used php for his
> web site because he can probably figure that out.
I'm starting to come around to this now, especially with AxKit which
relies on so many modules. I used to be a big fan of Activestate's PPM
system (still am, only I don't use NT any more). I just wish it could work
reliably on Linux, with so many different linux versions around.
--
<Matt/>
/|| ** Director and CTO **
//|| ** AxKit.com Ltd ** ** XML Application Serving **
// || ** http://axkit.org ** ** XSLT, XPathScript, XSP **
// \\| // ** Personal Web Site: http://sergeant.org/ **
\\//
//\\
// \\
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
