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.

cpan6 - moving forward 9 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • A while back I speculated on the various proposals for a "CPAN Replacement" I saw and mentioned that it appeared to me that there was a lack of planning.

    Mark asked me to not comment on CPAN6 until after the release at YAPC::EU and gave me an early copy of the paper, and I've happily done so.

    But reading through the final version of the paper, some concerns remain.

    Without wanting to get too much into specifics, I was wondering how you plan to deal with this type of thing. I see a lot of detail on what your so

    • The CPAN is very large and very complex, and replacing it isn't going to be as simple as we might think.

      Not true. The CPAN is rather small by today's standards and very simple. Clearly, you've not read the Zen paper describing the mechanics of it in very simple, straighforward terms. You are correct in supposing that it will not be simple to replace, but likely not for the right reasons. Anyone can build an ftp archive, put it on the net and open it for business. What makes CPAN work is not to be found in the software.

      I honestly cannot think of anybody involved in the existing CPAN that is qualified to design a complete replacement for the CPAN

      Uh, because they just...did it...instead of talking it over and taking 6+ years to design the ultimate archive? Over the years, I have repeated the message countless times since every idiot who feels like their 'brilliant' idea goes unheard or their itch doesn't get scratched is a deliberate snub from 'THEM' who run the archive who sit around with their thumb up their ass thinking up ways to frustrate the users: CPAN is simple in its mechanics, but the problems that do exist are either very hard to solve or inherent in perl itself. Beyond that lies the social problems which, for the most part, sort themselves out without intervention.

      My concern for this project is that clearly little research was done into what has been done in the past (e.g. that we had already agreed to Audrey's request to make a 6pan repos on the existing CPAN) and given that I've been told it was due to some hostility directed at those who run CPAN, it has a high potential go the same way as P6 and P5 have. CPAN is about the only thing keeping a lot of users of perl around and introducing a P6-like CPAN archive redesign project will be the last nail in the coffin.

      • My concern for this project is that clearly little research was done into what has been done in the past (e.g. that we had already agreed to Audrey's request to make a 6pan repos on the existing CPAN)

        While this was news to us, and our research did not uncover this - nor did any of the people at YAPC::Europe mention this to us - the efforts need not conflict; I hope they can re-inforce one another.

        CPAN is about the only thing keeping a lot of users of perl around and introducing a P6-like CPAN archive

        • This is a confusing assertion. Why would users care if another system is being built to replace it, especially if we are extremely careful not to switch the old one off for several years? It will be giving them only more options.

          Because if the same sort of design and implementation limbo that now exists with P6 with P5 more or less moribund, is introduced to CPAN, it has the potential to finally push away those who are already on the fence. One being dead and one not being implemented with far too many

          • Simpler approaches to the distribution problem are already under development, in competing projects such as 6pan. I wish them the best of luck and hope in turn to be able to be of benefit to them. Perhaps someone could follow-up with the link? I feel a bit shouted down with the way these comments work.
            • 6PAN is a competing project? *sigh*
            • Personally, I think that competing Perl repositories will only make matters worse. One of the reasons why CPAN is successful is that it is *the* place to turn to for Perl modules.

              Other than that, I won't repeat Elaine's, Adam's and brian's points because I agree with them. I think the three of you disagree much less than Elaine stated anyway.

              Steffen
      • > What makes CPAN work is not to be found in the software.

        And that is exactly what I mean.

        "CPAN" as an FTP archive is a non-issue, the actual distribution part is the simplest and most trivial part.

        What makes it successful is indeed due in big part to the social parts of the system, and those are the very things that a notional replacement design would have to take into account.

        > Uh, because they just...did it...instead of talking it over and taking 6+ years to design the ultimate archive?

        Who did? Var
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.