Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2021
On 10/4/21 3:08 PM, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 05:53:45PM +0900, Yuki Kimoto wrote:
>> 2021-10-4 5:42 Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> *installhtml* — I don't think this makes sense as an experiment. We
>>> should drop the experimental classification. #12726
>>> <https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/12726>
>>>
>>>
>> One by one, starting with the ones that seem to have little impact.
>>
>> Is there anyone who opposes this?
>
> I would oppose it, in its current state. The intended usage pattern
and documentation
> should be sorted out first. Specifically, the current Makefile.SH
says this
>
> # XXX Experimental. Hardwired values, but useful for testing.
> # Eventually Configure could ask for some of these values.
>
[snip]
>
> Configure actually does ask for some html installation variables, but
nothing uses
> them. Presumably, there was a mismatch between what Configure asks
for and what
> installhtml actually needed, but that mismatch was never resolved.
Recording the correct
> installation location in Config.pm is useful because that would allow
CPAN modules to
> reliably look up where to install HTML files.
>
> I think this all should be sorted out before declaring it
non-experimental.
>
I agree with Andy Dougherty, except that I would go further and drop
this make target entirely.
Earlier this year I worked on a refactoring of 'ext/Pod-Html', in the
course of which I had occasion to peer into 'installhtml'. I don't
claim to be an expert on that program since, among other things, I have
never actually had to use it in 21 years. But I did have occasion to
make one change in it ("set default podpath to './lib'";
f5e0f10e7065bfa21679406e5c9a604536f75585) in order to resolve an old bug
ticket, https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/11859.
Looking at the code for the 'install.html' target in 'Makefile.SH', I
now see that that code retains "-podpath=." -- which means it probably
does the wrong thing. At the very least, it's now out of synch with the
default values for the 'installhtml' program itself.
Given this problem with the target, and given that we have next to no
data from end-users as to how either the target or the program is
actually used, I believe that not only should we *not*
de-experimentalize the 'install.html' target, we should deprecate it and
then drop it altogether.
Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next