Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2017
Re: Perl 5.24.2-RC1 is now available!
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Steve Hay via perl5-porters
Date:
July 25, 2017 17:13
Subject:
Re: Perl 5.24.2-RC1 is now available!
Message ID:
CADED=K6eG7zdk+saOX1-Z4NGnYg_txT4dHiEwkU5WDQL=KF2=g@mail.gmail.com
On 10 July 2017 at 17:47, Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 07/04/2017 09:07 AM, Steve Hay via perl5-porters wrote:
>> On 4 July 2017 at 11:38, Dominic Hargreaves <dom@earth.li> wrote:
>>> Great stuff, thanks!
>>>
>>> I note that the base.pm commit from Aristotle does not appear in
>>> blead yet (or maint-5.26). It's lesss urgent there given that the
>>> defaults changed but it still has applicability there given that
>>> people could unset -Ddefault_inc_excludes_dot.
>>>
>>> Of course none of this should block the release of the 5.24.2 or
>>> 5.22.4, but would be good if it didn't get forgotten - and indeed
>>> perlpolicy at least implies that all maint fixes should come via blead.
>>>
>> I think this was deliberate, e.g. on 17 March Sawyer said (in reply to
>> Dave M) that nothing else on perl #127834 needs doing for 5.26.0
>> (https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=127834#txn-1453921), and
>> on 24 March Dave M reverted the various dot-in-INC changes that were
>> then current in base.pm (commit 6ee05a9b91).
>>
>> The latter was done under perl #128769. Originally, the intent there
>> was to revert the patches thus far in favour of Aristotle's
>> forthcoming patch, but then it ended up going like this:
>>
>> Graham Knop:
>>> Can't we just revert the base.pm changes without putting anything
>>> extra in place? We're already removing . from @INC globally. There's
>>> little need for base.pm to have its own protections, especially given
>>> how broken the current implementation is.
>> Sawyer:
>>> This makes sense.
>>> I spoke to Graham more about this on #p5p. There's no need to have an altered base.pm with 5.26.0 (because safe @INC is turned on by default anyway). When base.pm is released separately, it will simply be a different (and up-to-date) version.
>>> So we should undo the changes to base.pm in blead. Post 5.26 we could sync it with CPAN.
>> However, I agree that it would make sense for the final base.pm
>> changes to be ported forward to 5.26 (and blead, pending a new CPAN
>> release of base?) because of the possibility of people unsetting the
>> default exclusion of dot in @INC.
>>
>> If there is agreement on that (or at least, no disagreement) then I
>> will go ahead with that shortly, when I get things moving on 5.26.0.
>
> I agree. Thank you, Dominic, for raising this, and Steve, for handling it.
This is now in blead (fa71f6670dda393818d17f2f3bd2bee165347849) and in
maint-5.26 (a77da413199c4fd2fff89ca0d93014c4a32673c2). I'm not sure
how best to describe the change in perldelta, though. My brief
perldelta messages in maint-5.22/24 spoke of the previous releases in
those streams, so the message needs rewording for maint-5.26/blead.
Suggestions welcome :-)
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next