On 4/27/07, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Apr 2007, Allison Randal via RT wrote:
> Will Coleda wrote:
> >
> > My take: our long term goal is to eliminate the dependency we have on
> > perl. Let's not spend more time making it work with 5.6, but instead,
> > devote that time to furthering the the long term goal. I vote we just up
> > the (temporary!) requirement.
>
> Agreed. I hate yielding compatibility, but it makes sense in this case
> (since we're likely to eventually require that any Perl 5 code in the
> repository be able to run on the Parrot implementation of Perl 5).
Fair enough. I suggest the following patch. (The 5.8.4 version is
arbitrary. It's the oldest 5.8.x I happen to have installed for easy
testing. It should perhaps be replaced with whatever version regular
Parrot contributors are going to be using.)
--- parrot-current/README 2007-04-17 19:15:19.000000000 -0400
+++ parrot-andy/README 2007-04-27 09:24:12.000000000 -0400
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
Get it from http://www-306.ibm.com/software/globalization/icu/downloads.jsp
-You'll also need Perl 5.6.1 or above to run various configure and build
+You'll also need Perl 5.8.4 or above to run various configure and build
scripts.
For most of the platforms that we are supporting initially,
--- parrot-current/Configure.pl 2007-04-12 03:15:13.000000000 -0400
+++ parrot-andy/Configure.pl 2007-04-27 09:25:59.000000000 -0400
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@
=cut
-use 5.006_001;
+use 5.008_004; # 5.8.[0-3] might also work, but are untested.
use strict;
use warnings;
use lib 'lib';
5.8.4 seems reasonable, given that nobody seems to care much about
dropping 5.6 support. however, before applying this patch, we should
consider a deprecation cycle, to warn folks that the next release
version will require a newer version of perl. thoughts?
if we reach agreement that this should follow the standard deprecation
cycle, we'll need also to patch DEPRECATED.pod and refer to this
ticket number.
~jerry
