>>>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:01:23 -0500, brian d foy <brian.d....@gmail.com> >>>>> said:
bdf> [[ This message was both posted and mailed: see bdf> the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]] bdf> In article <a8c91d63-fa5b-4c46-aa71-e74ef68af...@gmail.com>, bdf> Christopher Fields <cjfiel...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have no idea why this is not being indexed; is it due to the module >> versions in the META.yml file? >> >> Copy of META.yml and error message here: >> >> https://gist.github.com/1284795 >> >> I had this problem before with BioPerl-DB, it seems specific to the >> 'provides' section, which is being autogenerated via Module::Build and >> './Build dist'. Maybe the 'version' = 0? bdf> Why are the module versions 0? That seems really odd. Is that the bdf> version in the module? I find at least two bugs involved. One is that META.yml is lying: it reports versions to be 0 even though the modules in that package all assign no version at all. The second bug was in the indexer that did not treat a version of zero as a proper version number. I've fixed the bug in the indexer and now CJFIELDS/BioPerl-Network-1.006901.tar.gz is indexed. I cannot guarantee that this will work well for the enduser because endusers will have modules without version numbers installed and they (or their software) will possibly conclude that CPAN has indexed a different version than what they have installed. If I were a user I would probably report the missing versions as a bug in the BioPerl-Network package. All that said, thanks to Christopher for finding and reporting the bug in the indexer. Would you fancy to bring the issue also to the attention of the Module::Build people? bdf> What happens if they are not zero? Now this would be boring, everything would simply work:) -- andreas
