Hi, On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Chris Nighswonger <cnighswon...@foundations.edu> wrote: > I think it would be poor practice to expect developers to > hunt for the oldest package which contained the desired functionality. It > would be better to adopt a sensible standard and adhere to it, which is what > I was proposing we do.
There's no harm if a developer who adds a new Perl module dependency had simply used the latest and greatest, but there's also no harm if somebody points out that an earlier version of the module can serve the needs of Koha just as well. Ideally, Koha's test cases will help bolster a decision to change a version requirement with evidence. Since it's a fact of life that different distributions are more or less conservative about how frequently they update packaged Perl modules, I think we ought to be a bit more flexible and accept that sometimes a minimum required version can be decreased. At least we can be grateful that, as far as I know, we don't have a situation where we need to specify a *maximum* required version for any of Koha's dependencies. Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton gmcha...@gmail.com _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha-community.org http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/