On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 5:21 AM, Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:28 AM, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I would also note that the META.yml license field is insufficiently > > documented, and that what little documentation there is shows that the > > spec is buggy. This page: > > http://module-build.sourceforge.net/META-spec-current.html#license > > > > says that it is required, and that the list of valid options is in the > > Module::Build manpage. There is no such list here: > > http://search.cpan.org/~kwilliams/Module-Build-0.2808/lib/Module/Build.pm > > By the way, I think one thing we need to change is to put the list of > valid options directly in the spec, and tell the reader of M::B::API > where the authoritative list is. Agreed.
Maybe there should be a module on CPAN (and maybe even distributed in core perl?) that list some of the major licenses *with their full text*. Then both Module::Build and MakeMaker could use a list exported from that module as the authoritative list for the license field. BTW It might be better to have an 'other' value which would mean the module author put it there on purpose and not the 'unknown' which might also indicate a missing value. Gabor
