Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2003
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 12:07:54PM -0800, schwern@pobox.com wrote: > 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? Only the last, and only for core modules that _also_ have a dual life on CPAN, like Storable. Tim.Thread Previous | Thread Next