Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2003
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 05:54:22PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > The current code isn't broken. It might not meet your aesthetic values, but > > > it's not broken. > > > > I don't believe Fergal is claiming Exporter is broken, he is offering an > > improvement. Not every patch need be a bug fix, we're still allowed to > > add interesting new features to Perl 5. > > Sure. [I think I sounded more harsh than I meant.] > > Modules that only live inside the perl distribution can be > changed in pretty much any compatible way with new releases. > > But for modules that have a dual life on CPAN I'd be less > comfortable with adding an extra dependency. Ok, clear something up for me. Are you expressing your own trepidation about using a new Exporter interface? Or about the idea of adding it to Exporter at all? Or the idea that once added, Fergal wants to change the core modules to use the new interface?Thread Previous | Thread Next