On 6/4/02 9:59 AM, "John Siracusa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> claimed:
> 1b. 6PAN modules comply with an informal contract to maintain > backward-compatibility within all N.MM versions, where N is constant. In > other words, incompatible API changes are only allowed by incrementing the > "major version" (e.g. going from 1.xx to 2.xx), and upgrades from one minor > version to the next (e.g. 1.05 to 1.11) MUST be "safe" (i.e. > "backward-compatible"). This might be asking too much -- it's not very perlish, in the sense of TIMTOWTDI. It might make sense for DKs, but different people may want to use the conventions their comfortable with. Perl is there for you to create applications (and APIs) the way you want, not the way the gods demand. > Thoughts? Or has this stuff already been hashed out elsewhere and I missed > it? :) One thing I think is as important -- or perhaps more important -- is to enforce the presence of unit tests. There are a lot of modules on the CPAN that have no tests, and most of them suffer for it. It shouldn't be required that all tests pass, however. A statement showing what platforms they pass on and what platforms they don't at the top of the download page would be good enough. But the tests have got to be there. Regard, David -- David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 15726394 http://david.wheeler.net/ Yahoo!: dew7e Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
