use Perl

• I made Distribution::Cooker (Score:2)

  by brian_d_foy (44)

  This sounds like a cool idea, and I've often thought of a similar tool. However, the cool features take longer to implement than the brute force work they would save me. :)

  I have my own solution to the starter template problem: Distribution::Cooker [cpan.org]. It's a simple idea; make a directory of templates that set up a module just the way you like them then process them. There are no other design restrictions. :)
  • Re: (Score:1)

    by rjbs (4671)

    I saw you mention D::C recently, but haven't yet had a look.

    Maybe I will be able to save you that brute force by implementing many or most of the features you'd want.

    Unfortunately, right now my test suite is, "if I install the new Dist::Zilla, can I still ship my code?"

    Hopefully that will get better, too...

    --
    rjbs
    • Re: (Score:2)

      by brian_d_foy (44)

      I'm not going to use Dist::Zilla, so don't worry about me. That's not a judgement on its potential, just a statement that I already have this figured out for my own process.

      I should have included an example earlier to illustrate my point: If I want to change the license of code once, it's faster for me to edit the files than set up everything in a particular way to use a tool. If I continually have to change the license, then a tool might make sense. I almost never have to change a license though. No amount
      • Re: (Score:1)

        by rjbs (4671)

        Yeah, license was a poor example. More likely is something like the Perl Email Project code, where I had to change a zillion "current maintainer" or "see also" sections that could've been made into chunks for inclusion at dist-making time. Or the time that I decided I wanted to start putting "=head1 VERSION" in all my modules, but would've had to go add it to 200 files to do so.

        I agree, though: I try not to write tools that I won't use. Often, I'm even successful.

        --
        rjbs