Hi, Thanks for everybody's input (I pretty much got slammed on this one). ;-) (see the condensed discussion thread at bottom)
No matter. I gladly table this discussion until (if/when) there is some actual code to vote on. Code speaks louder than words. This is what my conclusion is from the discussion. Use the following modules for dates and times Class::Date Date::Parse Date::Format Other people will come to different conclusions. We'll vote on resolving such problems when they actually become issues in code that someone has submitted. In the mean time, we each do what we please. ;-) Stephen _____________________________ On Wed, 14 Nov 2001, Stephen Adkins wrote: > * Is anyone interested in helping sort out Date and Time > functionality for the P5EE? * Matt Sergeant ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > No. This is *not* an enterprise API, IMO. Others may feel differently, but > we're not here to sort out all of CPAN! At 11:42 PM 11/14/2001 +0000, Greg McCarroll wrote: >I agree with Matt, we need to keep this project's scope confined. So >if I may (i'm going to do it anyway) I'd like to say what we should be >looking at. At 08:14 AM 11/15/2001 +0800, Gunther Birznieks wrote: >-1 on fixing CPAN fot Date/Time for NOW because it is outside of scope. > .... >Date and Time is definitely annoying. This is why we had to write a >Date/Time wrapper library (for our WebCalendar product) around both >Date::Manip AND Class::Date. Class::Date is probably one of the best right >now, but it has to be compiled and is completely unavailable (as of a few >weeks ago) from ActiveState PPM -- So it leaves out Win32 users. :( .... >My gut feeling is that we should standardize on using one or the other >though. And it is THIS that we should vote on before discussing making a >standard API. > >In other words, I would +1 the use of Class:Date as our standard Date/Time >module. But if other's feel that Class:Date has some significant >deficiencies that cannot be resolved (I think the lack of being compiled on >Win32 could be resolved) then we might want to consider at that point >extending the P5EE discussion to include a more standard wrapper around >CPAN modules for Date/Time consistency. At 10:23 PM 11/14/2001 -0500, Chris Winters wrote: >On the larger issue -- I don't think that date and time handling >should be in the P5EE sccope, but I also don't think that making >informal standards is such a bad thing either. That is, if any P5EE >APIs deal with dates or times we make our handling consistent with one >of the better modules out there, like Class::Date.
