From owner-freebsd-perl@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 22 19:54:50 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154F216A4CE; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:54:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cicero0.cybercity.dk (cicero0.cybercity.dk [212.242.40.52]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B49FD43D31; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:54:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from lars@thegler.dk) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (port156.ds1-bav.adsl.cybercity.dk [217.157.188.161]) by cicero0.cybercity.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD5429B19; Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:54:48 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <421B8E2F.40409@thegler.dk> Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 20:55:27 +0100 From: Lars Thegler User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (Windows/20041103) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erwin Lansing References: <30BB59AB1D524A38C1E77994@[192.168.1.5]> <20050222074403.GD80061@droso.net> In-Reply-To: <20050222074403.GD80061@droso.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: perl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: about databases/p5-DBD-Pg X-BeenThere: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: maintainer of a number of perl-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 19:54:50 -0000 Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 08:35:13AM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote: >>Last version of this only supports perl 5.6+ (requires DBI 1.38+), I'm on >>my way to update it, but should I ask for a repocopy to preserve the last >>5.005 compatible one ? > > *sigh* I wonder how many people still use perl 5.005_03 as more and more > modules no longer work with it, and many modules are starting to only > support 5.8+ and not even work with 5.6+. I don't think it's worth the > trouble to keep the older version as we did with p5-DBI. Remember that > it were other times then, when 4.x still was our production release. If > there comes a public outcry, we can always do one later. With all due respect, as long as 4.x is still officially alive, I think we should support it. I agree, the 5.005_03 usage is hopefully dwindling, but this can only be guesswork at best :) It is my observation, that most perl modules either just work on 5.005_03, or can be made to work with minor modifications. Of course, some modules use 5.6+ facilities and are harder, if not impossible, to make work under the old perl, and for these I find it perfectly reasonable to IGNORE them. I personally try my damndest to back-port stuff to 5.005_03, and it is only a waste of time if I'm alone in doing that ;) /Lars