Hi, Exec Summary: am I ok to drop PAUSE permissions on PerlIO::Scalar, PerlIO::Via, and VMS::stdio? I’m writing this wearing my PAUSE admin hat. I’m working through clearing up situations where people have permissions on package names that only differ in case. Most cases are where people have renamed a module, and not dropped the old permissions. Once we’ve resolved all these situations, we can tighten up PAUSE, and don’t need to have code to deal with various conflict edge cases. There are three pairs of module names where I’d like to drop the permissions on the no-longer-used name, where and if that’s possible. One of them is non-trivial. P5P has first-come permissions on both PerlIO::scalar and PerlIO::Scalar. The former is what’s now released with Perl 5 (and a bunch of people have co-maint on it as well), and the latter appears to have been released between 5.007003 and 5.008 (I’m looking at Module::CoreList). Similarly P5P has first-come on both PerlIO::via and PerlIO::Via. The former is what’s in use, and the latter was between 5.007003 and 5.008. Question: am I ok to drop the permissions on the no-longer used PerlIO::Scalar and PerlIO::Via? The pair of VMS::stdio and VMS::Stdio is a bit more tricky: ext/VMS-Stdio/Stdio.pm starts with the expected: package VMS::Stdio; but then later on we see: ################################################################################ # Intercept calls to old VMS::stdio package, complain, and hand off # This will be removed in a future version of VMS::Stdio package VMS::stdio; If you look in the CPAN index (02packages), you’ll see that it’s the deprecated VMS::stdio that gets indexed. Questions: Are we enough in the future that VMS::stdio can be dropped? And more relevantly for me, am I ok to drop all the permissions on VMS::stdio? That would result in VMS::Stdio being indexed for the next release, though I don’t think the indexing is that much of an issue, since they’re core modules with upstream undef. Cheers, NeilThread Next