David Evans devans at
Tue Jul 22 14:25:10 PDT 2014

On 7/22/14 1:01 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
>> I think it is way too early to be switching to it by default. Much less the only option. So I vote we at least keep perl 5.16 and perl 5.18 and all of their modules around for a while.  
> only perl5.18 currently has a maintainer in MacPorts.
> upstream has perl5.18 in maintenance mode, and recommends installing perl5.20 (previous perl5.x versions are all End of life).
We have two topics going here:

  1) trimming old/outdated/unsupported perl ports
  2) what to do about Mojca's commit that broke perl5.20 builds

I suggest we do the following:

  * agree on which old perl5 ports can be dispensed with.  Looks like we
can agree at this point on removing anything older than perl5.16 as a
starting point.  I tend to support inclusion of perl5.16 for now because
it is the only recent version that has good port coverage.  (Of a total
of 1045 ports, 1042 support perl5.16, 137 perl5.18, 10 perl5.20).  This
amounts to current version, last version and most recent EOL version.

  * revert as soon as possible Mojca's recent commit that broke perl5.20
builds until the there has been more discussion and the
details/consequences worked out.  This is no comment about the merit of
his suggestion, just that it breaks things.  If he would set up a
separate test branch, I would be happy to help test.  This would allow
progress on adding perl5.20 ports.

  * work toward filling out perl5.18 and perl5.20 ports with the goal of
moving to a more recent default version as soon as coverage permits.  If
you're going to add a perl5.18 subport, add the perl5.20 as well so it
doesn't have to be done twice.

Just some broad strokes but it would be nice to come to an agreement
that would allow us to move forward.  Comments?


More information about the macports-dev mailing list