develooper Front page | perl.module-authors | Postings from December 2006

Re: EU::MM vs Module::Build

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Eric Wilhelm
Date:
December 31, 2006 14:26
Subject:
Re: EU::MM vs Module::Build
Message ID:
200612311425.49354.ewilhelm@cpan.org
# from Paul LeoNerd Evans
# on Sunday 31 December 2006 03:14 am:

>EU::MM can't, but I believe Module::Build can. That said, the
> consensus on #perl/Freenode is that the latter isn't really ready
> yet, so just use the former.

Is it not ready only because the consensus says it is not ready and 
therefore it is not in use enough to be believed that it is ready?

# from Paul LeoNerd Evans
# on Sunday 31 December 2006 07:23 am:

>but there isn't currently a way to make
>ExtUtils::MakeMaker have build-time dependencies that don't turn into
>runtime dependencies. I have in fact reported a bug/wishlist/"I'll
> patch it if you think this is good" ticket on it:
>
>  http://rt.cpan.org//Ticket/Display.html?id=24159

So, instead of using Module::Build, which has this feature, you're going 
to wait for it to be added to the "please kill this" installer which 
doesn't?

http://schwern.org/~schwern/talks/MakeMaker_Is_DOOMED/slides/slide001.html

Seems to me that it would be in the EU::MM maintainer's best interest to 
*never* support that feature.  Thus, you (and others) would have 
motivation to use Module::Build and therefore the consensus would 
change from "not sure" to "works great" (and Schwern will finally get 
his wish of putting some concrete boots on EU::MM and waving to it as 
it quickly sinks into the murky depths of the Willamette.)

I've been using Module::Build exclusively for at least a year now and 
the only trouble I've had has been from users running an old CPAN.pm 
(but that's only because I'm cruel enough to quit including 
compatibility makefiles specifically because I think it's a good idea 
for users to upgrade CPAN.pm once a year or so (hey, it's a free 
upgrade.))

I guess the best way to solve the chicken and egg problem is to make a 
chicken omelet.  If you want a feature, just have a dependency.  Same 
goes for whether or not to use Test::Exception.  The installer will get 
better over time (usually with little or no effort on your part), but 
writing your own code or workaround to avoid a dependency means you get 
to maintain that forever.

--Eric
-- 
Don't worry about what anybody else is going to do. The best way to
predict the future is to invent it.
--Alan Kay
---------------------------------------------------
    http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About