In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> >1. Not register it. This maintains the current situation.
> Your preference against this namespace notwithstanding, what happens if some
> does get a module approved in th
On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> you have quite a bit of say in this.
>
> here are the options i can think of, but other people might have more
> ideas.
>
>1. Not register it. This maintains the current situation.
Your preference against this namespace notwithstanding, what happens
On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> the first author to upload a new namespace effectively owns it, whether
> or not they register it. no one should be able to upload something over
> your namespace.
> you do not need anyone's permission to upload something to CPAN. the
> PAUSE admins ar
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> I'm not going to keep arguing my case. If this is your show and I have no say
> in this, then tell me explicitly what my options are, or what you are (or
> aren't) going to do,
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This whole debacle with Parse::PlainConfig opens up a few questions about the
> integrity of CPAN. If I am to believe brian's assertion that I proceeded with
> the module with *any* consensus at all, why was I allowed to
Greetings:
This whole debacle with Parse::PlainConfig opens up a few questions about the
integrity of CPAN. If I am to believe brian's assertion that I proceeded with
the module with *any* consensus at all, why was I allowed to upload it?
Allowing authors to upload willy-nilly could potentially c
On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> the only thing i see there is that Tim suggested a name. i do not
> see any decision or plurality.
When I applied for the Curses::* modules I was told that the absence of an
objection implied acceptance. I took the advice for the name, and went with
i
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In short, I think you would do well to note that dumping it from CPAN would be
> a disservice to those already using it, and expecting it to be there. I would
> also be somewhat disheartened to have this list go back on a
On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, _brian_d_foy wrote:
> i don't think Parse is the right top-level namespace for this,
> especially since that is not all this module does.
>
> besides that, i think i can incorporate the differences into
> ConfigReader::Simple, since the modules are so similar.
Hold on, we've
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Perl Authors
Upload Server <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The following module was proposed for inclusion in the Module List:
>
> modid: Parse::PlainConfig
i don't think Parse is the right top-level namespace for this,
especially since that is not all this m
10 matches
Mail list logo
