Andy Lester wrote:
I've just released Module::Starter 0.02, meant as a replacement for h2xs.
I just reinstalled Debian on my laptop with the default perl (5.6.1).
The following are the modules required and "requested" for
Module::Starter and its dependents. Not complaining or making any
judgemen
> Yeah, I actually wonder whether the two projects could be merged
> somehow. Is Geoffrey responsive to emails about EU::ModuleMaker?
Dunno. I only found out about EU::ModuleMaker yesterday.
xoa
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
On Apr 5, 2004, at 3:18 PM, Mark Stosberg wrote:
I think would useful to include "ExtUtils::ModuleMaker" in a SEE ALSO
section, and explain the key differences. At first glance the projects
seem quite similar.
Yeah, I actually wonder whether the two projects could be merged
somehow. Is Geoffrey
Andy Lester wrote:
I've just released Module::Starter 0.02, meant as a replacement for h2xs.
I think h2xs is very out of date as far as current best practices for
modules. It's also very intimidating for people who just want to create
a module, and have no need for all the compiler hoohah that h2
Andy Lester wrote:
I've just released Module::Starter 0.02, meant as a replacement for h2xs.
I just reinstalled Debian on my laptop with the default perl (5.6.1).
The following are the modules required and "requested" for
Module::Starter and its dependents. Not complaining or making any
judgemen
On Mon, Apr 05, 2004 at 02:15:30PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> I've just released Module::Starter 0.02, meant as a replacement for h2xs.
>
> I think h2xs is very out of date as far as current best practices for
> modules. It's also very intimidating for people who just want to create
> a module,
I've just released Module::Starter 0.02, meant as a replacement for h2xs.
I think h2xs is very out of date as far as current best practices for
modules. It's also very intimidating for people who just want to create
a module, and have no need for all the compiler hoohah that h2xs throws
at you.