1 |
This is geared mostly towards arch devs, but I'm open to any comments :) |
2 |
|
3 |
A new version of g-cpan is about a week away. Lot of feature additions, |
4 |
upgrades, code revisions (wouldn't recommend diff'ing the current to the new |
5 |
because I know there's only a few lines in common). It's still 100% perl (in |
6 |
fact, the old version was only 95%, so that's another improvement - no more |
7 |
system calls, ick), and the big reason for even going down the road of a |
8 |
rewrite was to add support for the intended split of dev-perl into new, |
9 |
smaller, manageable(!) categories. |
10 |
|
11 |
In the past, g-cpan was lumped in with portage, so it received all of the |
12 |
keyword bliss of portage. When it was initially split from portage it also |
13 |
inherited that keyword batch, since the version in the split and the version |
14 |
in the current portage were identical. But herein lies my dilemma. While 100% |
15 |
perl code means there ~shouldn't~ be any issues on any platform that can |
16 |
install perl, I don't want to tick any arch's off by unmasking en masse. |
17 |
Would you all prefer a bug with recommended tests for the new version? Do you |
18 |
all even care? :) Let me know, on list, off list, just don't call me late at |
19 |
night, it makes the wife wonder. |
20 |
|
21 |
Mike |
22 |
|
23 |
-- |
24 |
|
25 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |
26 |
Michael Cummings | #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl |
27 |
Gentoo Perl Dev | on irc.freenode.net |
28 |
-----o()o--------------------------------------------- |