Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2001
Re: The case for SDKs
From:
Elaine -HFB- Ashton
Date:
August 3, 2001 13:44
Subject:
Re: The case for SDKs
Message ID:
20010803154439.K24738@chaos.wustl.edu
Peter Scott [Peter@PSDT.com] quoth:
*>
*>Eh, you know what I mean. They have enough things to think about
*>already. I do enough of that kind of work to feel their pain :-)
Well, Perl modules are a walk in the park compared to installing libraries
developed on linux by people who never heard of Solaris...but I digress :)
I don't see a lot of SA's griping about installing stuff...mostly I've
heard people complain about 'the night of the living perl upgrade that
nearly ate Chicago'.
*>I think the SDKs *are* bundles, just with explicit versions. But that they
*>should be blessed by a pumpking, otherwise we're making work for people who
*>have to ask, "Which is best, Bundle::Web::HFB, Bundle::Web::MSERGEANT,
*>Bundle::Web::MERLYN, or Bundle::Web::MWRIGHT???"
The SDKs were, at last check, supposed to be precompiled packages for
various platforms for ease of use and install. I don't see that Bundles
are terribly different other than the 'precompiled' part is removed thus
decreasing much of the overhead. Having major 'blessed' versions in the
prime namespaces would suit most people I would guess and the subclassing
of them would likely be discouraged.
Also, I think it would be exceedingly interesting to see what modules
people choose for their bundles and it would likely be more representative
than a bunch of people wheezing on about this or that module on a mailing
list selecting which modules deserve to be in the SDK. :)
e.