Randy,
I've a question regarding the 'requires' tag.
For example, we have Apache::* modules. Some of them can run only under mod_perl 1.0, others only under mod_perl 2.0, and there are those who can run with both generations. The 'requires' tag in your proposal says:
I<Note: The exact nature of the fancy specifications like S<C<E<gt>= 1.2, != 1.5, E<lt> 2.0>> is subject to change. Advance notice will be given here. The simple specifications like C<1.2> will not change in format.>
Can this be finalized? Or is it an issue with EU::MM and M::B needing to agree on the advanced syntax of PREREQ_PM?
We need at least these cases:
# any requires: mod_perl: 1.01
# only mp1 requires: mod_perl: < 1.99
# only mp2 requires: mod_perl: >= 1.99
IIRC, there was some discussion at some point... ok, right here <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=1676522&forum_id=10905>. I think Ken was considering other alternatives, so the above was never finalized. I think he's on these lists, but I'll cc him and let him respond.
--
Hmm, I also find in this thread something similar to my proposal for optional_features suggested by Autrijus. I missed that before.
And in searching I see I also missed this thread <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_id=1790056&forum_id=10905>. Where the provides field was first documented. There is some duplication in this and the no_index proposal.
I guess I wasn't as thorough as I thought. :(
Randy.
It would be nice if the module-build ML were on <nntp.perl.org> and archived at <http://nntp.x.perl.org/group/>.
