Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2006
David Nicol wrote: >> Also moving more commonly used modules into core perl, making the core >> perl experience more usable would improve the lot of many, many, many >> a perl developer who is limited by policy that they cannot form >> dependencies on modules that arent in core. A group that I think is >> much larger and IMO much more important than the "minimal core" types >> realize. > > the "minimal core" concept is usually part of a bundle that includes an > approval process -- such as what happens to get a CPAN module into the > PPMs that come with ActiveState (unless I'm wrong about that) > > In case all we're looking for is a good name for "What Is Around The Core, > But Still Within The Rind" I propose we continue drawing terms from the > world of fruit and call the Greater Core Package "pulp." Apparently, I'm scheduled to sit down with Audrey and Larry at the hackfest and discuss this very same issue for Perl 6, including what to call it (Core Level 1, 2, 3, etc being rejected). I'll let you know, so we can reuse the terminology. Adam K