Ron,
With all respect, I believe it is fundamentally wrong to impose your personal
preferences about how to version modules to the whole community. There is no
such thing as to "modules need version number" official guideline for module
writers, and I believe it should stays so.
And don't take just my word to it. Here's one of perl flagship modules,
Catalyst, for example. The only place where version is declared is in the main
module file. And there's so many many others.
We can definitely discuss that it would be a better scheme for versioning in
the future though, but as for now I certainly don't agree with you that it is
up for me to fix the problem.
Sincerely,
Dmitry
On Sun, Aug 09, 2015 at 11:57:14PM -0400, bulk88 wrote:
> Ron Savage wrote:
> > Hi Dmitry
> >
> > I personally don't accept the argument that there are special cases
> > whereby modules don't need version numbers.
> >
> > This issue is up to you to fix. It's not up to the PAUSE admins to do this.
> >
> > Just put something like
> > our $VERSION = '1.43';
> > in all your *.pm files.
> >
>
> Not everyone agrees with or uses Dist::Zilla. Bumping synchronous
> version numbers is a burden. I'd guess there has to be some way to
> delete a package from PAUSE to reset the version to zero or unknown.
--
Sincerely,
Dmitry Karasik
F
