develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from December 2016

Re: Should we bring in Module::Runtime into core?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Karen Etheridge
December 5, 2016 01:30
Re: Should we bring in Module::Runtime into core?
Message ID:
On build prereqs: a patch has been waiting for over a year to remove the
unnecessary dependency on Module::Build --

On reverse dependencies:[[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 <> 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
> is having problems at the moment.
> Thank you very much.
> Jim Keenan

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About