On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Dr.Ruud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Suggestion for a core license.pm:
>
> package license;
> $LICENSE = "perl";
> 1;
>
> sub import {
> eval sprintf q/*%s::LICENSE=\\"%s"/,
>scalar caller,
>@_ == 2 ? $_[1] : join ",", @_[1..$#_];
> 1;
> }
> __END__
>
> (an
David Cantrell schreef:
> eval "use threads" || exit(0);
Alternatively written as:
exit(0) unless eval "use threads";
(just because I wondered how strong the "||" was in there)
--
Affijn, Ruud
"Gewoon is een tijger."
Ricardo SIGNES schreef:
> * Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-11-03T09:49:01]
>> What I would like to do next is make it more of a pure pass-through,
>> so that anything S::L knows about can be fed to M::B. That might
>> depend on having a registry in S::L, or it might mean an author could
>
On Sat, Nov 01, 2008 at 01:25:17PM +, Ben Morrow wrote:
> Quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nicholas Clark):
> > $ /home/nclark/Sandpit/588ish/bin/perl -Mthreads -e0
> > This Perl not built to support threads
> > Compilation failed in require.
> > BEGIN failed--compilation aborted.
> No, this still does
* Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-11-03T09:49:01]
> I noticed that, so I actually just provided explicit mappings for the
> licenses M::B already knew about:
Cool. You might want to have a look at Software::LicenseUtils, which does a
reverse mapping sort of like your forward mapping:
h
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:19 AM, Ricardo SIGNES
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ken: is it possible to specify a S:L class directly as a license, now? I ask
> because the existing license keys are ambiguous.
I noticed that, so I actually just provided explicit mappings for the
licenses M::B already k
* Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-11-02T22:55:46]
> Announcement: I've just committed change 12024 to Module::Build for
> creating a LICENSE file during the "dist" phase using
> Software::License. To get such behavior the author sets the
> "create_license" parameter to new().
In celebratio
