On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 09:00:10 -0400, David Golden wrote:
Hi David
> All three are specific, well-understood (in hindsight) and have now
> been addressed.
We are probably all aware that many things, including hindsight, and clear in
hindsight :-).
--
Cheers
Ron Savage, [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 23/07/
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:59:13 -0400, John Peacock wrote:
Hi John
> The problem is one of communication and insufficient testing, not
> architectural. I didn't think to test on a machine that didn't have
> *either* M::B or version.pm installed (which is the only case where
> there is any problem).
John,
many thanks, I'll try as soon as possible if it works for me now ;)
Gerrit
John Peacock wrote:
Yet another iteration, trying to get the compatibility Makefile.PL to
run in more places (and correctly, too!).
John
Original Message
Subject: CPAN Upload: J/JP/JPEACOCK/
Hi all,
I'll be hanging around OSCamp and loitering in the hallway around OSCON
at random intervals in this coming week. Any chance of getting an M::B
BOF/hackfest going?
--Eric
--
Issues of control, repair, improvement, cost, or just plain
understandability all come down strongly in favor of
# from John Peacock
# on Saturday 22 July 2006 05:59 am:
>The problem is one of communication and insufficient testing
Hmm. Is there some way that we could test new releases in several
combinations of platform/perl-version/installed-modules environments?
Seems like somebody should build one of
Johan Vromans wrote:
> Dealing with version numbers is not quite trivial, but should be
> fairly straightforward to deal with. I cannot (and for the time being
> I refuse to) believe that it takes 651 releases (652 at the time I
> write this) to get it right.
Nit - CPAN history has 0.50, 0.63, 0.
Ron Savage wrote:
>> I don't know all the inner details, but this M::B and version
>> dancing gives me the strong impression that something is terribly
>> wrong here at a fundamental design level.
>
> Clearly something's wrong, but it may not be anything big, even though it's a
> sort of show-sto
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 11:26:29 +0200, Johan Vromans wrote:
Hi Johan
> I know I'm not entitled to say this, and it will make me even more
> unpopular than I already am, but nevertheless I'm not going to
> remain silent.
I fully support your speaking up.
> I don't know all the inner details, but th
John Peacock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Eric Wilhelm pointed out [...], so I released version-0.651 to fix
> that. Then he pointed out [...] I pointed out [...] Consequently, he
> pointed out [...], so I propose the following patch:
I know I'm not entitled to say this, and it will make me even
