develooper Front page | perl.module.build | Postings from September 2007

Re: Which takes precedence, provides or no_index? (was Re: PAUSE indexer report MSCHWERN/Alien-SVN-1.4.5.2.tar.gz)

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Ken Williams
Date:
September 22, 2007 16:30
Subject:
Re: Which takes precedence, provides or no_index? (was Re: PAUSE indexer report MSCHWERN/Alien-SVN-1.4.5.2.tar.gz)
Message ID:
69C984BE-C860-43ED-A8C3-28A5E3B9C32F@gmail.com

On Sep 22, 2007, at 8:46 AM, David Golden wrote:

> On 9/21/07, Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Michael G Schwern wrote:
>> Hmm.  I just noticed that I set 'no_index' for the src directory  
>> which
>> contains the SVN:: modules which brings up the interesting  
>> question of which
>> takes precedence, no_index or provides?
>>
>> Since provides is explicit, I'd say it should override the more  
>> general no_index.
>
> My understanding is that these serve two different purposes.
>
> "provides" indicates what modules are included in the tarball so that
> tools don't have to unpack the tarball to understand the contents.

The meaning of "provides" is very specific: if a distribution  
provides Foo::Bar and you want Foo::Bar, you can install that  
distribution.

My understanding is that "no_index" is only useful when "provides"  
isn't there and an indexer has to guess what you provide.  When  
"provides" is there, it should be exhaustive.  Note that the spec  
says "indexers will usually trust the C<provides> field if it's  
present."  That's just a recommendation from me to the owners of the  
indexers, but I think it's one they follow.

So in Schwern's case, "provides" should indeed win, and furthermore  
you should be able to just remove "no_index" altogether.

  -Ken


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