Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • by Matts (1087) on 2002.07.09 16:40 (#10335) Journal
    I think Licenses is unnecessary - RMS can bite my shiny metal ass. As can your lawyer. As long as you have a LICENSE section in your POD (I violate this in several modules though).

    Telling me that Makefile.PL shouldn't prompt though is just wrong. There's a lot of cases where it should. What about optional modules (via ExtUtils::AutoInstall - the recommended way by CPAN testers)? What about locations of things like the httpd when you need to test mod_perl modules (and no, finding it in the usual paths isn't enough - what if I have an RPM httpd in  /usr/bin, but the one I want to use is  /opt/apache?)? There's lots of factors here.

    Other than that, I mostly agree.
    • Prompting: well, like I said, it's not always possible. But if you can get those things into command line arguments it means I can decide them all up front and come back to that window after lunch. (It also makes it easier to put modules into core. The main perl source has recently eliminated one of the last interactive prompts (at install time). Of course, you may never want your mod_perl modules in core.  :) ) If someone's installing something as complicated as a mod_perl module, I'd say there's

      --
      J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
      • I *think* ExtUtils::AutoInstall allows some command line flags to either install everything or install nothing. Not sure though.

        As for CD makers, they should take some more time and effort over it - contact the authors of things you want to put on there, and offer them a free copy ferchristsake. The CPAN is a free resource and everyone can get it, so don't try and con people into thinking that it's a massive bonus to be able to get a version of this software without downloading it.
    • Sorry, Matt, you're completely wrong. Any questions that your Makefile.PL needs should be supplied on the command line or in environment variables. If it can't autodetect what it needs then it should die and say so.

      Non-Interactivity is an absolute necessity when you're building packages from modules and expecting them to work.

      If you want to do clever stuff, let the advanced user that needs to do it read the damn docs and figure out how to do so. Optimise for the common case by not asking questions.

      • I'm not WRONG. I just have a different opinion to you.

        Writing installers is probably the hardest part of every single software project I've ever worked on. Period. This is not something Open Source developers need to be wasting their time on when they can ask questions and have an easier life.

        Feel free to supply patches.
        • Feel free to supply patches.

          That's the real answer. "Right" and "wrong" are really defined by the module author. If someone else wants it another way, is willing to do the work, and the module author doesn't mind, great!

          But I think you'll find most of us increasingly prefer non-interactive installations.

          --
          J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers