I think this would be highly inappropriate.
Some of the Win32 modules are simply what we have right now. They are being
actively maintained, shown in the fact that they accompany ActiveState's
ActivePerl and are functional, but the versions on CPAN are two or more
years old and don't compile with Perl 5.6. It appears that the maintenance
is only happening inside ActiveState, and Dick isn't releasing the updates
(or may be discouraging his employees from publishing updates to CPAN).
Win32::COM is an example. Yet we can't disregard those modules.
Other modules, in CPAN itself for example, are prerequisites to modules that
do appear to be actively maintained, but are nowhere to be found on CPAN. We
don't want this kind of situation in the sdk, I wouldn't imagine.
And still others are finished, and do not need maintenance, like
File::Slurp.
I would imagine that there are modules that need to be finished/maintained,
but nobody seems to be working on them. If so, I don't see harm in removing
them. But you need to put some caution into that.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Horsley Tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 7:29 AM
Subject: RE: All's fair (in) love and the sdk list
> Here's a thought for the sdk list:
>
> Perhaps one of the criteria for inclusion should be modules in the
> list must have an "active" maintainer (where the definition of active
> is subject to much interpretation :-).
>
> It won't do much good to include mouldes in the sdk, then have lots of
> folks try to build the sdk, find problems, send in patches, only to
> discover there is no one willing to apply the patches.
>
