Faisal N Jawdat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> We can probably safely up the requirement for HTML::Parser in our next >> major revision. Conditioning is also okay.
> What are reasons against doing this? I've sat through the "What is > the regexp for matching this HTML pattern", "Don't use a regexp to > parse HTML, use a real parser", "Here, HTML::Parser", "Wait, that's > an optional install -- we can't rely on that" conversation at least 4 > times *in the last 10 days*. I have no idea what your point is. We already require HTML::Parser. The only question is whether or not we should raise the minimum required version. I suggested that we raise it and I doubt anyone will have major objections since we haven't raised the minimum version for a while. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
