On 8 Jan 2018, at 13:42 (-0500), Daniel J. Luke wrote:
On Jan 8, 2018, at 1:36 PM, Bill Cole
<macportsusers-20171...@billmail.scconsult.com> wrote:
I think a better approach would be to either require the p5-foo port
OR (better) require path:${perl5.lib}/Foo.pm:p5.${perl5.major}-foo or
(best) create a new syntax for dependencies that check for
functionality, i.e. use the return value of 'perl -e "use Foo 6.66;"'
to decide whether to install p5.${perl5.major}-foo @6.66 (or greater)
or most simply:
Provide one version of perl5 (whatever the current released version of
perl is). Provide p5-foo ports that build with whatever the current
perl5 is. There isn't a good reason to try to support multiple
versions of perl5, if we didn't try to do so we could jettison all of
this complexity.
An issue with that is the fact that some amount of perl5 code in the
wild (often including widely-used non-core modules) is broken with each
major version. This is why upstream maintains 2 major versions at a
time, releasing a new version every Spring. So if MacPorts supports just
one version, it would need to be the older supported version for some
months after the annual release.
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Currently Seeking Steady Work: https://linkedin.com/in/billcole
