On Tue, 4 Apr 2006 19:27:57 -0400, Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-04T10:40:39] > > And then still people make more of the same. Take Getopt::Long. A perfect > > and > > very functional module. Full of features, matured, and actively maintained. > > Now go look at CPAN, and see how many people either do not like it or find > > other reasons to write their own. > > > > The problems arise when authors of big modules start prefering non-core > > versions of good core modules. IMHO something like that should give you a > > (very) negative score on CPANTS. > > Could you elaborate on this? As stated, it seems pretty ludicrous to me. It > reads like this: > > You should not use module B that is like module A, if A is in the core > distribution. This is true regardless of the fact that B may be better > optimized for your current needs, planned needs, programming style. I'll just mention two things, both very different A. CORE modules are tested on all supported architectures, while CPAN modules do not give that guarantee. The smoke system still causes all possible combinations to be tested on various architectures in various configurations. I don't say that CPAN module authors didn't test their module on as many architectures as available to the author, but even if the author has, say, 4 architectures, it is very unlikely that all of these architectures have 32bit and 64bit builds, threaded and non-threaded builds and even multiple versions of perl available. B. Let's just name YAML. Up until 0.38 it was not to difficult to install a module that is very useful, but now in 0.58, it uses a different test suite, that needs Spiffy, that needs ...... For me that was the drop. No more YAML. If just for the test suite of a module I have to install half of CPAN and I'm not going to use that for anything else, while there is a perfectly good and widely used and actively maintained Test::More available, this is just plain insane. My opinion only. > This can be further distilled to: > > There's more than one way to do it, but most of them will get you dirty > looks. Maybe, but authors might need to keep above statements in mind when adding new dependencies. -- H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/) using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.9.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11, & 11.23, SuSE 10.0, AIX 4.3 & 5.2, and Cygwin. http://qa.perl.org http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
