On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Group Authorship
[...]
> reefknot is developed on sourceforge, release on CPAN; 3 possible IDs
> but no one knew which ID would publish reefknot
So?
In any case, Andreas (and/or Jarkko) explained it well (summary:
it works as designed) elsewhere to Skud (I think it was).
> CPANTS
[...]
> making the barriers to entry high is one way to ensure good code on
> CPAN, but it's a crappy way to go about it
Jon Orwant thinks the barriers to entry being too high. We talked
about this at the CPAN meeting at TPC4. I don't remember the
consensus.
> Group CVS
> Action item: Ask Ask to open up CVS on onion for public r/w
>
> Action Item: Ask Ask to set up group perms and assignment of group
> perms for CVS projects
I'd rather have us just use SourceForge if the code is going to be
public anyway.
> Versioning:
> Big sky issue
We talked about this extensively at the CPAN meeting at the last
TPC. Sarathy, Larry, Tim Bunce, Jarkko, Graham and many others were
there and had all kinds of good ideas.
> PPM:
[...]
> No one has built alternative repositories of modules
I don't use Windows, but last I checked there was a few alternative
PPM repositories. (Or maybe I'm misunderstanding something).
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> [general dissatisfaction]
>
> upload process for new module authors kinda sucks
What sucks about it?
> slow response
Read the FAQ. http://www.cpan.org/modules/04pause.html#namespace
"You need not wait for a response. Generally a lack of response can
be taken as acceptance of the module name being proposed."
> this is why cpan as we know it is disorganized
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a lot of unfun human effort; is there any way to
> get this stuff happening? Registering namespaces [automated request],
> etc.
Eh, it does work automagically.
[snip]
- ask
--
ask bjoern hansen, http://ask.netcetera.dk/ !try; do();
