Dana Hudes wrote:
I sympathize with the compiler errors. But its not acceptable to have someone
other than the maintainer decide to remove a contribution from CPAN
Who ever said anything about removing it?
Just move it out of the main index into an 'archival' section where
it is clear that it is no longer being maintained.
It is there for reference, and if someone wants to pick it up and
revive it, it will be there, but in the namespace, it would get moved
under Archives::Module-2.1.2.
We can find a workable middle ground, for most people...only the
unreasonable need be excised.
;-)
BTW not everyone uses gcc.
What compiler on linux -- where perl was born, would you suggest?
If it doesn't work on freely available and unencumbered tools (i.e.
nothing more restrictive than the license on perl), then wouldn't it
violate the implied site license?
It is its own 'standard' mostly. I agree that usually C code needs to be
generic and portable but this may not be possible. I have code (not mine, but
that of one of the programmers I support at work) gcc won't compile but
Solaris Studio does (and vice versa alas).
And solaris studio is free?... no prob. Is it limited to solaris
platforms? Then those items
need to note it AND if someone wants to develop the same module name for
an unsupported platform,
then arrangements need to be made to do the right thing (right module
is loaded, and top level
becomes platform/vendor agnostic)...
This isn't rocket science folks... you all should know this.
