Hi, I find this module intriguing.
In my understanding, the complexity of Module::Build piled up because the same tool tries to cover both installation and authoring use cases. I believe the Dist::Zilla approach is a better way to take care of authoring: a separate toolchain that can be as complex as the author would prefer. The installer can then be trivial, as indeed it should; as well as pure Perl – as indeed, it should. So Dist::Zilla plus the *idea* of Module::Build::Tiny seem to fulfil the original concept of Module::Build better than that module itself ever has. But is the implementation up to par? Essentially: if I’m using Dist::Zilla for authoring, what regular features not explicitly mentioned in MBT’s POD would I have to avoid? Do things like optional or build-/test-only deps work? (I’d assume these do.) Or can I assume that everything will work unless otherwise pointed out? I could answer this for myself if I had *exact* understanding of how much of the work falls upon the .PL at install time, and how many of the toolchain features are implemented in the CPAN client and thus unaffected by MBT’s minimalism. So the answer to that is what I’d like. (I’d also be interested in whether any omissions mentioned in the POD are design choices or the idea is to add them in the future, and which if so.) Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
