# from Michael Ludwig
# on Saturday 26 November 2011 11:34:
>I don't understand the concern for unauthorised use. How would
>it be different from relying on any other implementation detail?
>In spirit, it's like relying on internal JDK classes.
Java users don't complain loudly enough to be awarded squatters rights?
I think "Not for consumption. You have been warned." says it all.
Maintainers need show no mercy if they can point to that statement.
I would still like to see something like a mouseless deployment with all
of the roles and accessors pre-flattened somehow. But of course, you
may need the use() statements if only setup the metaclasses for use by
extensions -- depending on how you go about the flattening. Maybe the
pre-cooked stuff could be in the TB2/TinyRodent.pm file?
--Eric
--
"Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse."
--Murphy's Corollary
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
