develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2013

Re: the mystery of the undef upstreams

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Jan Dubois
Date:
June 27, 2013 17:34
Subject:
Re: the mystery of the undef upstreams
Message ID:
CAD-TLz8y-7pGLxV6GeOZstkWsv4ZO-BeGP2ctcsCOVHN2D8HQQ@mail.gmail.com
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Steffen Mueller <smueller@cpan.org> wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 05:32 PM, Karen Etheridge wrote:
>> A module being part of core has a higher expectation of stability, so the
>> obligations on the author are higher (so if the author cannot fulfill them
>> in whatever circumstance, others must have the ability to step in as
>> needed).  IMHO.

The "Social Contract about Contributed Modules" that is nowadays part
of perlpolicy.pod is supposed to set appropriate expectations for both
authors and porters.

> ... agreed. I think it's mostly a historical matter of "we didn't use to
> tell people this when we took their modules into core, so we can't just
> adopt the policy without talking to everyone first".

The "Social Contract" was written in response to an ugly argument
between (some people on) P5P and Graham Barr about control over
Scalar-List-Utils. So the rules/limitations spelled out in that
document were not set down arbitrarily, but are an agreed upon
compromise.

Cheers,
-Jan

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About