Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:02:22 +0000
From:      Tom Hukins <tom@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-perl@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: announcement of future perl changes.
Message-ID:  <20130611160222.GE35400@eborcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5bB%2BhYifjBky17tMBk9JXJsicQWNCc2mVyaj94tuLmbittEw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAD5bB%2BjZgA9nNDC_cJP3T8VPW4%2BvgN2Y4Boh_5ca==BjyxZWPw@mail.gmail.com> <20130611151127.GD35400@eborcom.com> <CAD5bB%2BhYifjBky17tMBk9JXJsicQWNCc2mVyaj94tuLmbittEw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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?

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.  If
you haven't validated this assumption, what do you plan to do if it
turns out to be false?

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.

I hope I have expressed my concerns better this time.

Tom



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130611160222.GE35400>