Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/12/23/14:49:21
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
> To further explain, suppose we had a package of all the DateTime::
> modules (which are broken up into many distributions, but I hope you
> would agree would belong together). They have a number of small
> general purpose dependencies; putting those in the same package
> doesn't make sense to me, nor does packaging each individually.
Yitzchak,
If they have their own CPAN Bundles, then I suppose it would makes sense
to use those in some cases (NOT, for example, Bundle::Gnome2, for the
reasons I stated before). But if they are just simple, non-essential
CPAN modules and aren't (potential) prereq's for something else, then I
don't see a reason to package them at all.
I think that we need to consider the precedents set by other distros.
For example, Gentoo policy[1] is not to make ebuilds for simple CPAN
modules that are non-essential and not required for another package.
[1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ebuild-submit.xml
There are some CPAN modules (libwww-perl comes to mind) which IIRC I
have seen as part of Fedora, Debian, and Gentoo, so that should be a
candidate.
> I would lump them all together, along with the few modules we don't
> have packaged yet but that come bundled with ActivePerl (for
> competitive purposes :) and maybe some of the modules that will be
> bundled with perl in 5.10.
Could you provide a list of what you have in mind? That would give me a
better idea of what we're talking about.
Yaakov
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDrFTFpiWmPGlmQSMRAkDvAKCyMxvXq5/QgZeZijeasOmiOw8aegCgs6Ui
5SMttw1wexMi6GsMHBOi33Y=
=gb4+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -