[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       perl-module-build
Subject:    Re: thoughts on DWIM bundling
From:       David Golden <xdaveg () gmail ! com>
Date:       2009-09-09 4:26:53
Message-ID: 5d4beb40909082126r995b3ffi7e2d02bf34deae8d () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Adam
Kennedy<adamkennedybackup@gmail.com> wrote:
> I also think that blindly using a newer version of something without
> knowing if it's compatible with the bundled one is asking for trouble.
> But that's more a call to make sure a compatibility assurance
> mechanism is implemented, rather than saying don't do it.

It's no different than the current situation where different people
have different versions of M::B installed.  We don't want upgrading
M::B to break on existing M::B dists on CPAN.  We now use a reasonably
robust regression test to confirm this is the case before major
releases.
There's no more risk in using a newer M::B over a bundled one than
there is upgrading M::B in the first place.

Yes, this reflects a difference of philosophy between the M::I and
M::B camps, but let's not refight that war.  M::B inc/ bundling is
just a stopgap until configure_requires is widely adopted, anyway.

David
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]