On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 12:26 PM, Eric Wilhelm <enoba...@gmail.com> wrote: > # from David Cantrell > # on Wednesday 08 April 2009 12:06: > >> As I've said before, this is silly. It's a tool, so either it works >> or >> >>> it doesn't. We can't really have "controversy" about whether it >>> works or how it works. >> >>Despite your saying that we can't, we do. There is disagreement about >>whether it's a good idea to use Module::Build, and merely denying that >>the disagreement exists is ... well, it's silly. > > You're saying there is a debate about whether stagnation is a good idea? > > Dissenters are certainly free to hold their opinions without reason, but > I would rather they not inflict those irrationalities on others as > advice. > > Please elaborate on why one should *not* use Module::Build.
One reason - because it's nonstandard. It doesn't ship with Perl, and all the classic Perl books say to use "perl Makefile.PL" and "make" commands.
