On 1/30/06, David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Luke Closs wrote: > PPM is only really useful on Windows. It makes sense for it to bundled > with the main Windows port of perl, but not to include it otherwise.
I don't know if I buy that. Im assuming that ppm is bundled with all of the AS builds of perl, which arent restricted to Windows. > > - All CPAN packages are built to into PPDs automatically on common > > platforms > > Thankyou for volunteering to do this. Note, however, that the only > place that PPM is common is Windows, so that's the only one you won't be > wasting your effort on. I dont agree. In my experience getting admins to compile stuff can be a real pain. I do my main dev on win32 and sometimes have to migrate the code over to HP-UX and in my experience getting the admins to install stuff from CPAN is a pain, especially when it involves compilation. If precompiled binaries were available and the install process was smoother then I think things would be easier. > > This would allow non-perl people to install perl packages much easier, > > There are lots of programs out there which are built using perl but for > which the user need not know a thing about perl. They generally use > stuff like autoconf and make, not ppm. You are speaking of developer/admin types from the *nix/dev tradition. If you arent lucky enough to work with people like this then stuff that requires such process is almost useless to you. > > without having to mess with the CPAN shell and running tests. > > Tests are a Very Good Thing. If you're installing my code on a platform > I've never seen, such as Windows 2000, then I want you to run the tests, > and I want my code to not install if they fail. That way, when you > email me to say "it doesn't work" you'll be able to include something > useful like the test results and there's a possibility that I might be > able to fix the code for you. I agree. I think not bundling tests with ppm installs was a bad call. The tests arent run on the target machine, and the user doesnt have a regression framework to utilize if spot fixes are required. With a cpan module I can tweak the package, run the regression tests and then reinstall. With ppm tht isnt possible. > And anyway, what's so hard about "perl -MCPAN -e 'install Foo::Bar'"? I think the main issue is it requires a higher skill level to use than something like ppm. Ive been surprised a number of times at the reaction of non perl types to the requirements for using CPAN. I was surprised at how many developer and/or admin types I have encountered who found it too difficult to work with. BTW, while reading this debate I cant help but think that there is a certain amount of talking at cross purposes here. Some of the comments suggest to me that the person stating them hasnt thought much about other peoples needs or perceptions. This is a big issue with a lot of angles, and what suits one person, enviornment, or tradition isnt necessarily the end of the story. For instance comments like "Only OS-Foo people dont have compilers, therefore a solution to the compilation problem is only of use to the OS-Foo users and the rest of us shouldnt care" "My favorite OS has a perfectly good packaging system so Perl doesnt need one at all" "My favorite OS has a perfectly good packaging system so everybody should use it" don't seem to me to be very productive. Im not saying this to anyone in particular its just a general observation. yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
