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.

Encourage ActiveState to do the Right Thing 14 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Maybe this could encourage you to use ExtUtils::MakeMaker instead?

    • I use both. Here's a typical Build.PL file of mine:

      #!/usr/bin/perl -w

      use strict;
      use Module::Build;

      my $builder = Module::Build->new(
          module_name       => 'aliased',
          license           => 'perl',
          dist_author       => 'Curtis "Ovid" Poe <moc.oohay@eop_divo_sitruc>',
          dist_version_from => 'lib/aliased.pm',
          requires          => {

    • A word on Module::Build

      I actually prefer Module::Build over ExtUtils::MakeMaker simply due to it's extensibility, Module::Install however seems to be very popular these days - I have no experiences with this module however.

      I use Module::Build extensively for non-CPAN projects aswell and this has proven quite resourceful, adding new actions for building databases, adding users etc.

      In my opinion Module::Build is a good module, it scratches my itch.
  • They have a mailing list specifically for the packaging system. I would provide a link, but they seem to be having technical difficulties with their site at the moment.
  • Well you could...but it would be hard to convince me to replace a "stable" ActiveState install with it.

      • From the wiki:

        Strawberry Perl is currently an alpha release and is not recommended for production purposes.

        My PHB would not like me doing that.

        • And your PHP would be right. However, when Strawberry Perl is ready for production, I can't imagine a reason in the world why anyone would want to stick with ActiveState.

          • I don't understand the PHP comment. I *hate* PHP. However, ActiveState works for our shop (Windows) and they have been very helpful when I have posed questions to them.

            Once Strawberry hits a couple beta levels then I will try it. I *do* like the premise behind it.

            • I meant "PHB". Whoops :)

              The nice thing about Strawberry Perl is that it comes bundled with its own compiler and make. As a result, you can use cpan and cpanp just like any other Perl installation. You're not dependent on ActiveState providing you a PPM or hunting around for a PPM from somewhere else.

              That's not to say I have anything against ActiveState. They're a company, they need to earn money and they need to figure out the best allocation of their resources and shepherding a bunch of CPAN module

              • Ohhhh! PHB! I hate those too. : )

                I will move to Strawberry Perl just because:

                • It will give me more control
                • I will be able to contribute back

                Those 2 reasons are good enough for me any day.

              • One thing I don't like is it sometimes takes them a long time to get secondary modules up-to-date. I just looked at Object::InsideOut and it is at 2.01 but I can only get 1.45 from PPM. I know they do their thing because of the binary support and corporate assurance but I can make those decisions.

                SP just needs to get beta or something for me to try it at work is all.

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