Author: ericwilhelm
Date: Sat Nov 17 02:10:29 2007
New Revision: 10264
Modified:
Module-Build/trunk/lib/Module/Build/ModuleInfo.pm
Log:
lib/Module/Build/ModuleInfo.pm - make 'eval' package unique (bug #30747)
Modified: Module-Build/trunk/lib/Module/Build/ModuleInfo.pm
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:48:18 -0800, Eric Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
# from Andreas J. Koenig
# on Thursday 15 November 2007 23:39:
So I'd like to propose a perl_version: key for META.yml, which
would be specifically to identify the minimum Perl language version
dependency
# from Andreas J. Koenig
# on Saturday 17 November 2007 01:54:
A different and slightly less brute fix would probably be to say
version::-new() like I do on all package names always everywhere
because it's the only safe way to call a method on a package name that
has no colons in it.
Well, or
On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 02:10:40 -0800, Eric Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
# from Andreas J. Koenig
# on Saturday 17 November 2007 01:54:
A different and slightly less brute fix would probably be to say
version::-new() like I do on all package names always everywhere
because it's the
Dear god that is evil.
How the hell is doing that sort of stuff.
Adam K
On 17/11/2007, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A bug in MakeMaker's parse_version() was found recently. Module::Build
has
the same bug.
https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=30747
It's reproducible
On Nov 15, 2007, at 5:38 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
After a number of incidents, it would appear that putting the Perl
version
dependency into requires is just too problematic to be an appropriate
solution.
Why?
It also has implications from a CPAN graph perspective.
If a module has a Perl
Ken Williams wrote:
On Nov 15, 2007, at 5:38 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
After a number of incidents, it would appear that putting the Perl
version
dependency into requires is just too problematic to be an appropriate
solution.
Why?
Because cramming two meanings into one name sucks. It
Ken Williams wrote:
What is the reason for saying require? If there is one, we need a begin
block, right?
Yeah. I guess it was require() because we wanted to have a nice error
message even for perl4? That hardly seems like an important use case
anymore though.
use 5.xxx is a 5.6 thing.
David Golden wrote:
On 10/29/07, Ken Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 28, 2007, at 4:54 PM, Ron Savage wrote:
From my point of view, as a module author, the spec has the bug in it.
Yet look what happens to everyone's parsing tools when we change the
spec in the name of convenience:
