Do we conclude from this that most people use RPMs? -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kinyon [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 14 April 2011 16:31 To: Duncan Garland Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] Module versioning
Defaults are just that - defaults. If your workflow needs something else, then do that. Rob On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 11:23, Duncan Garland <[email protected]> wrote: > The default Catalyst make process uses CPAN. That's why we have been > installing from CPAN. A major objective has been to keep to the defaults. > > The modules are different and they probably shouldn't be. We'll check the > module versions higher up the dependency chain. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Kinyon [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 14 April 2011 15:32 > To: DBIx::Class user and developer list > Cc: Duncan Garland > Subject: Re: [Dbix-class] Module versioning > > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 09:51, Duncan Garland > <[email protected]> wrote: >> What’s the most common/best method of keeping the modules consistent between >> systems? Since we joined the Catalyst/DBIx community we’ve become much more >> dependent on that sort of thing. > > You should be worried about distribution versions, not module > versions. This is the sort of thing that rpm (and similar tools) was > designed to solve. Nothing says you have to use the community RPMs. At > $work, we build RPMs of the stuff we depend on. Then, we build RPMs of > our stuff with dependencies on the RPMs we built of CPAN modules. > Then, we have our own internal RPM repository that we deploy to prod > from. > > That way, we control our upgrades, we know what we have where, and we > don't worry about module $VERSION numbers. > > Rob > -- Thanks, Rob Kinyon
_______________________________________________ List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/ Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/[email protected]
