Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2007
RE: $Win32::VERSION problem
February 27, 2007 10:41
RE: $Win32::VERSION problem
Message ID: email@example.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
"Jan Dubois" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 09:13:03AM -0800, Jan Dubois wrote:
>> > Yes, and the forwarder() function (now in ext/Win32CORE/Win32CORE.c
>> > requires Win32 version 0.27 or later: Therefore you will not be able
>> > to use old versions of the Win32 module with bleadperl anymore.
>> I was working on the assumption that all the movement/rearrangement of
>> the win32 directory, win32/ext and the Win32 modules was appropriate
>> to replicate in maint.
>> But "not be able to use" doesn't seem a good thing for maint.
>It is indeed a bit worrisome, and I have to admit that I didn't even
>realize this problem before today.
>But assuming I re-release an otherwise unchanged libwin32 without the
>Win32 module to CPAN would that be good enough? Or do we imply that you
>can install any older CPAN version of a core module on the latest
>maintenance release and it will still work?
ARG! No! This way lies madness.
As Dave already stated in the past, the home and primary developmen of
dual-lived modules is blead. Putting them on CPAN serves only two purposes:
* so people of current stable Perls can get them earlier and not have to
wait for the next stable release to get bugfixes and new features
* get the into more wide spread testing of CPAN-testers
Consider this a bonus. (The alternative is that everybody has to wait for
the next stable Perl to get the bugfixes and new features).
Now, there are some developers here who also take this as their personal
quest that these dual-lived modules should install on any old Perl
possible - while others like me consider this somewhat wasted resources and
draw the line for much newer Perls (e.g. something more sane like 5.6.2,
which itself is quite ancient, whereas others consider 5.005 still "needs
to be supported").
This is of course just a personal matter, and everyone is welcome to support
any *the newest version* of their dual-life module on any old Perl version
they see fit.
However, there shouldn't be a guaruantee for anything going back more than
the latest stable release (this is 5.8.8). Consider yourself lucky if it
works on anything older (if not, patches welcome :-)
Of course, if such a support for older (even the latest stable) Perls
becomes impossible because a feature such a dual-lifed module uses is
available only in blead, things become very tricky.
If you are lucky, the dual-lived module gets split into a blead-only
and "older-perl-only" versions. This is however only optional. No
guaranties. Dual-lifed modules could also be withdrawn and put pure-core
only any time.
Furthermore, IMO there is and should never be a guarantee that you can also
install OLD versions of dual-lived modules on older or newer Perls. This
would prevent effectively any new development or new features in these
modules and/or blead.
All the best,
Signed on Tue Feb 27 19:39:44 2007 with key 0x93B84C15.
View my photo gallery: http://bloodgate.com/photos
PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----