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

[neil@bowers.com: Module::CoreList::upstream]

Thread Next
From:
Chris 'BinGOs' Williams
Date:
July 3, 2013 20:03
Subject:
[neil@bowers.com: Module::CoreList::upstream]
Message ID:
20130703200332.GA22934@klanker.bingosnet.co.uk
----- Forwarded message from Neil Bowers <neil@bowers.com> -----

Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2013 00:13:16 +0100
From: Neil Bowers <neil@bowers.com>
To: chris@bingosnet.co.uk
Subject: Module::CoreList::upstream
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)

   Hi Chris,
   I have a couple of questions about upstream -- I'm still mapping out my
   understanding of core modules :-)
   (1) What's the correct interpretation of a core module not being
   in %Module::CoreList::upstream?

     The doc for Module::CoreList says:
         %Module::CoreList::upstream
             A hash that contains information on where patches should be
     directed
             for each core module.
     On first reading, this implied that every core module would appear
     in %Module::CoreList::upstream.
     But since that's not true, what's the correct interpretation for modules
     not in %upstream?
     The doc also says:

       "undef" implies that this hasn't been discussed for the module at
       hand.

     So perhaps it could be taken like this, but I could also see an argument
     for the default being 'blead'.
     Would you like a patch for Module::CoreList?

       (a) to add the missing modules, or
       (b) to change the doc to explicitly defined the interpretation for a
       module that isn't listed?

     For example, Getopt::Std isn't in %upstream. It doesn't exist separately
     on CPAN, but I notice that 06perms.txt says:

       Getopt::Std,DAPM,c

       Getopt::Std,DOM,c

       Getopt::Std,FLORA,c

       Getopt::Std,JESSE,c

       Getopt::Std,LBROCARD,c

       Getopt::Std,NWCLARK,c

       Getopt::Std,P5P,m

       Getopt::Std,RJBS,c

       Getopt::Std,perl,c

     Which is curious. Why do those people all have perms for a module that's
     only ever been a core module (I believe)?
     And what's the difference between 'P5P' and 'perl'?

   (2) What if I want to patch a module with undef in %upstream?

     If I want to patch a module that is in %upstream with a value of undef,
     should I raise it on p5p, or just submit a patch as if it was 'blead',
     but note that upstream isn't defined? eg parent.

   (3) Should I have emailed this to p5p?

     You're listed in Porting/Maintainers.pl as the maintainer
     for Module::CoreList, which is why I'm emailing you.

   Cheers,
   Neil

----- End forwarded message -----

These questions are best asked on p5p list.

-- 
Chris Williams
aka BinGOs
PGP ID 0x4658671F
http://www.gumbynet.org.uk
==========================

Thread Next


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