Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:35:34 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin <bapt@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrej Zverev <az@freebsd.org> Cc: Tom Hukins <tom@freebsd.org>, freebsd-perl@freebsd.org Subject: Re: announcement of future perl changes. Message-ID: <20130611183534.GI35160@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> In-Reply-To: <CAD5bB%2BiucsFVTgkeqR-QYCbA33-UEhi8ZV9-3oPeCnqA9c1_NQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAD5bB%2BjZgA9nNDC_cJP3T8VPW4%2BvgN2Y4Boh_5ca==BjyxZWPw@mail.gmail.com> <20130611151127.GD35400@eborcom.com> <CAD5bB%2BhYifjBky17tMBk9JXJsicQWNCc2mVyaj94tuLmbittEw@mail.gmail.com> <20130611160222.GE35400@eborcom.com> <CAD5bB%2BiucsFVTgkeqR-QYCbA33-UEhi8ZV9-3oPeCnqA9c1_NQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--yKpjvgUFh4AHjl21
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 08:49:55PM +0400, Andrej Zverev wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Tom Hukins <tom@freebsd.org> wrote:
>=20
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 07:38:28PM +0400, Andrej Zverev wrote:
> > > I'm sorry but I don't get idea at all. Why do i need argue on
> > > perl5-ports? and I don't see how I'm trying to violate POLA.
> > > Can you explain in more details, please?
> >
> > Thank you for your quick reply. I apologise for my confusing reply.
> > I'll try to explain better:
> >
> > You propose replacing major.minor.patch with major.minor for Perl 5 in
> > FreeBSD's ports and packages. If this change makes sense, why
> > restrict it to these? Why not share it with perl users everywhere?
> >
> You asking me almost same thing like: if we change PREFIX for port, why
> don't share such information with other people. In reality I did not hack
> perl source code itself, all what i did is avaliable for all perl users
> (via configuration).
> Well, you can look at debian or fedora and maybe more distros which alrea=
dy
> done such trick.
>=20
>=20
> >
> > Furthermore, by restricting discussion to this list, and not
> > perl5-porters, you fail to validate your assumption that the patch
> > level of the version number will never include API/ABI changes.
>=20
> My patch only change directory (part of it) where perl will be installed.
> Every other aspects still remain (binary name and etc).
> perl5-porters don't need to be involved.
>=20
Lots of linux distribution already does major.minor, and there is also some
making this directory only perl${major} and I have also seen some perl with=
out
version.
The perl build system allow that exactly for distributor to chose what fits=
best
their needs and how they handle the upgrades.
>=20
> > If
> > you haven't validated this assumption, what do you plan to do if it
> > turns out to be false?
> > tt
>=20
>=20
> > As for POLA, perl users everywhere will expect major.minor.patch
> > because it's how perl installs itself. If FreeBSD changes this for
> > ports and packages, we become a not-quite-perl ghetto that subtly
> > forks the standard distribution.
> >
> Hell no! :-) In your terms this mean we do violating POLA with every perl
> upgrade.
>=20
That is totally wrong, otherwise perl won't provide a mechanism to do it :)=
, btw
have a look at how perl is packaged elsewhere as I said above there is no c=
ommon
mechanism.
regards,
Bapt
--yKpjvgUFh4AHjl21
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAlG3bfYACgkQ8kTtMUmk6EwhHwCdE0F1WGTrQY8B13lNtz0nKAUL
AVoAnjsBjd47uXb0nEwWFECnYn60aU+D
=SouC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--yKpjvgUFh4AHjl21--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130611183534.GI35160>