On Thursday, December 16, 2004 4:05 PM, Ed Summers wrote: >It might be a good idea to release the current MARC::Lint as a separate >package to CPAN before releasing new versions. That way we have a baseline >to work from. >Bryan if you need help doing this for the first time (from SourceForge) let me >know and I'll give you a hand (inkdroid on AIM and Yahoo).
I hope to have time to work on this this weekend. The only changes I plan to make to the current version are the DATA fixes described before (adding 001-008 and correcting the valid/obsolete indicator values). I've downloaded the most recent tag list, with update 4 (Oct. 2003). I planned on cleaning that up and adding it to the DATA section for the first stand-alone release. Other than the readme (currently empty), is there anything else that would prevent the current files in CVS from being released as the first CPAN version? I'm unclear on how version numbering will work. Should the first release (as given by the our $VERSION statement) be 1.38, as it is currently, updated to 1.39 to note the corrected/updated data, or to something else (1.00, though that might conflict with previous versions included with MARC::Record)? How do you maintain/contend with version numbers for releases compared with the version assigned by the CVS server? I haven't really looked around in my CVS client's settings--do most have a way of telling the server what version to set/how much to increment the version when a file is added/committed? I would definitely need help in producing a release for CPAN. My SSH/CVS clients are only available at home, which is an unreliable dial-up connection, so I rarely log on there. My AIM client hasn't gotten much use in the past few years, but perhaps now would be a good time to see if it still runs. I think my username, if it still exists, is similar to my CPAN e-mail address. On Thursday, December 16, 2004 4:01 PM, Andy Lester wrote: >I would see nothing wrong with gutting the checker entirely and redoing >how it works. I don't have immediate plans for gutting the checker, at least not in the near term (especially given my limited knowledge of perl). It seems to be working well enough for now. >I think you definitely will want to build that in from day one. Look at >the tidy project, which I've wrapped up in HTML::Tidy. That sounds like a good suggestion. Thank you for your assistance, Bryan Baldus [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) http://home.inwave.com/eija
