perl (again)

[Mark Anderson]

I sadly have not had enough time to work on cpan-mp, I've been mostly
learning the internals of macports first. But yeah, like I said on that
other thread, the latest perl is enough. Back when 5.x stalled because
everyone thought 6 was coming out it was ok to stay still. But now we get
new Perls regularly.

—Mark
_______________________
Mark E. Anderson <emer at emer.net>


On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:42 PM, Mojca Miklavec <mojca at macports.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 8:37 PM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
> > On Jun 10, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> >>
> >> I would be really grateful if someone would be
> >> willing to look into the above mentioned ticket. We would need a
> >> slight modification of the configure/build scripts.
> >
> > That change seems reasonable to me, but it would be worthwhile to look
> at what other packaging systems do (and/or to follow ryan's advice and talk
> to the perl devs about it)
>
> A while back I asked on stackoverflow and got a suggestion to install
> perlbrew.
>
> (
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23270656/how-to-install-perl-without-sub-version-number-in-path-lib-perl5-5-x-y-lib
> )
>
> But yes, we should ask that. (I nevertheless made a change in perl
> 5.20 to see how it works.)
>
> >> Other questions are still open. (One of the "complaints" about the
> >> current situation [ignoring the situation itself] is that if I go
> >> ahead and start modifying maintained p5-foo ports, maintainers will
> >> start complaining.
> >
> > I don't see that as a 'problem' (more works as intended) - you shouldn't
> make changes to a port someone else maintains without communicating with
> them (unless the port is 'broken').
>
> Yes, I understand that. But in the context of perl ports this *is* a
> problem. The only reasonable solution would be to open a ticket, CC
> all maintainers of all thousand perl packages, ask them to fix/upgrade
> their ports in the next 3-10 days (or argue why the ports shouldn't be
> changed), and that all other ports could be changed based on
> maintainer timeout at any time. Opening thousand tickets just to
> request an update seems like an overkill.
>
> (But yes, something needs to be done to facilitate automatic upgrades,
> at least for ports where no special treatment is needed.)
>
> > either we get the maintainers to update their ports, add openmaintainer,
> or we follow the port abandonment procedure and get the port updated to
> nomaintainer.
>
> Or that.
>
> > maybe eventually get some level 'automatic' support of modules from CPAN
> without having to write/update portfiles for each module when most of them
> will 'just work'?)
>
> Yes, that would be ideal. It just needs work.
>
> Btw: Perl 5.16 is no longer supported.
>
> Mojca
> _______________________________________________
> macports-dev mailing list
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org
> https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20140610/df627330/attachment.html>