Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2016
On build prereqs: a patch has been waiting for over a year to remove the unnecessary dependency on Module::Build -- https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=96557 On reverse dependencies: https://metacpan.org/requires/distribution/Module-Runtime?sort=[[2,1]] The highest up-river dependencies are Module::Implementation, and things used by Moose. If this module were to come into core, I would want its outstanding discrepancies to be corrected (see the RT queue). But I would echo Rik's request for a comparison to Module::Load, as I have posed to toolchain in the past why we cannot fix Module::Load up so it can be the implementation of choice. On Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 2:44 PM, James E Keenan <jkeen@verizon.net> wrote: > On 12/04/2016 04:10 PM, James E Keenan wrote: > >> On 12/04/2016 11:55 AM, Sawyer X wrote: >> >>> It has been suggested several times to ship Module::Runtime in core. I >>> have considered it and discussed it with Zefram a little bit yesterday. >>> >>> >> I don't recall those discussions, perhaps because I look more closely at >> RT items than other mailing list entries. But I will take a look at it. >> If we decide to go forward, I recommend opening an RT to log the >> inclusion. >> >> > 1. I notice that on CPAN Module::Runtime is fundamentally built from > Module::Build. Its Makefile.PL is "auto-generated by Module::Build::Compat > version 0.4204." But we no longer carry Module::Build in core. That means > we would need a "pure" Makefile.PL, i.e., one generated by > ExtUtils::MakeMaker -- correct? > > 2. I wanted to examine this module's "Depended on by" status, but > deps.cpantesters.org is having problems at the moment. > > Thank you very much. > Jim Keenan > >Thread Previous | Thread Next