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
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Thanks, links question (Score:1)
I have a question about the del.icio.us integration. In one case several links were aggregated into one post. In other cases, which link got it's own post.
What's the difference? Or, why do it both ways?
Re: (Score:2)
I've been using the delicious "daily blog posting" tool to wrap up a day's links and add them as a single entry to my blog. But the planet includes both the blog feed and the raw delicious feed. So delicious links appear twice on the planet.
I'll going to turn off the delicious daily posting tool.
Thank you (Score:2)
I hope to be able to use this someday. I've been needing such a tool but on a lower scale than plagger. Unfortunately I'm so busy with $NEW_JOB I'm not sure when I'll get to try it out. :)
J. David works really hard, has a passion for writing good software, and knows many of the world's best Perl programmers
Validation (Score:1)
There are, however, two RT tickets (#33881 [cpan.org], adding accessors for some required feed types, and #29684 [cpan.org], which stops 'convert' generating empty summaries) which will help you get towards a valid feed.
I really should write up the other changes I had to make to genenerate a valid Atom feed [feedvalidator.org]. I think convert needs help with applying an updated date to RSS feeds, for example. There are also issues with RSS and Atom taking different values for th
Re: (Score:2)
I'll apply the patches from RT locally and wait for the next release of XML::Feed to fix the problems.
[1] Often a pointless task on a planet as so much of the markup is out of your control.
Re: (Score:1)
Similar attributes cause issues with the Atom feed, but they don't prevent validation, merely cause warnings, because Atom does at least recognise the concept of extensibility.
Plagger dependencies (Score:2)
http://search.cpan.org/src/MIYAGAWA/Plagger-0.7.17/META.yml [cpan.org]
Plagger's "requirement" modules are all generic, from Cache, DateTime and LWP to HTML, XML and URI fetch modules. They are all necessary to all kinds of data sources and output as well. Other "plugins" are all pure perl and you can just skip installing the dependencies, which are disabled by
Re: (Score:2)
You're absolutely right (of course!) The vast majority of the pre-requisites are optional. I had forgotten that.
I still think, however, that you're bundling too much stuff together. If I was bundling Plagger I'd create a core distribution that just read feeds, combined them and published new ones. I'd then relegate all
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason why we haven't done this was probably because we had never got to the point "yes we're done", and I just didn't want to see people uploading their random Plagger plugins to CPAN that will eventually be unmaintained, abandoned, out of sync with core, and in a poor quality code etc, etc.
It doesn't take you a minute to name a few Catalyst modules that are "out-of-date" or "was a total mistak
failed to install (Score:1)
First, I tried several alternatives for using PAR, building a packed file on my Linux laptop and uploading to the FreeBSD server. That failed in part because PAR failed to detect all the dependencies, including some of the XML::Feed namespace modules and some of the DateTime modules. It was also overly conservative about which modules it through n
Re: (Score:2)
The dependencies checker indicates that XML::Feed has a 44% chance [cantrell.org.uk] of installing correctly whereas Plagger has a 26% chance [cantrell.org.uk]. Of course, Plagger uses XML::Feed so Plagger never going to be easier to install than XML::Feed.
I had exactly the same problem with XML::LibXML that you did. My server is a Fedora Core 6 system and I install all of my modules using rpm (buildi
Optional extras (Score:2)
The likelihood of success calculated by cpandeps only takes into account the mandatory dependencies (those in 'requires' and 'build_requires') and ignores those that are merely recommended - taking recommended modules into account would in fact *reduce* the chance of success. It's also worth noting that the link you give is for the dependency tree and test results when using latest version of perl (5.10.0) and for any operating system. It's always a good idea to change the filters to match your perl versi
Re: (Score:1)