>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2003 21:44:11 -0800 (PST), David Muir Sharnoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >said:
> * That is still not a good idea. As brian says, metainformation > * like that should not encoded in the module name. Also, it wouldn't > * necessarily encode *enough* information, such as whether the author > * has some recommendations to use instead of the deprecated one. > * > * Why can't the Makefile.PL of a deprecated module simply be changed to > * make the right discouragements, along with the documentation (=head1 > * DEPRECATED, maybe?)? > I'm hoping for something that would actually get noticed, but I'm > not willing to go so far as to break existing installations. I actually had to do this once with a module that had a Y2K bug that nobody wanted to fix. I kept the old name, gave it a higher version number and added all the sort of discouragement that Jarkko is talking about. This strategy definitely worked very well. About two or three years later I deleted it. The module name was Date::GetDate and you can get it from the backpan. http://mirrors.develooper.com/perl/backpan/authors/id/A/AN/ANDK/ The funniest feedback I got was from a user who asked me for permission to use it in a commercial project. It turned out, the email was from an automated script and so the sender and I had a good laugh. -- andreas
