Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2007
On 2/27/07, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <sthoenna@efn.org> wrote: > Tels wrote: > > 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). > > Perhaps this is how it actually plays out most of the time, but > Porting/Contract has a very different take. In the case under > consideration, Win32API::File, removing the indirect object syntax > seemed to me something better done by way of the module owner(s) > rather than in bleadperl. I am one of the maintainers, and I would rather backport blead changes than the other way around. More peopl eare likely to test and patch the blead version than the cpan version (just due to self-selection, people on p5p are highly likely to be inclined to post patches, and Ill see them there.) Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next