-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Dave Rolsky wrote:
>And all I'm suggesting is that because there is no other way to do this >stuff, that when you change the text in the generated Makefile, that >you at least document that it has changed, so people can test their >ugly hacks against the new version. That sounds prohibitively expensive in developer time. Almost any significant change will result in differing Makefile content. Even code tidying and refactoring might change the Makefile in whitespace or ordering of targets, which could break some people's regexps. Besides the 'documentation' itself should not get cluttered with a hundred change messages about the Makefile content, which was never supposed to be documented anyway. Of course I wouldn't be the one doing it anyway, so it's really none of my business, but I just want to say that as a MakeMaker _user_ I wouldn't expect such a service or have any right to expect it. I think that people who do ugly hacks against the generated Makefile (and I have a _lot_ of them myself) really just deserve what they get. In practice such hacks are often necessary, but also in practice you cannot get bogged down in documenting every internal Makefile change. So please, use whatever means necessary to clean out the Augean stable that is MakeMaker - regexping the Makefile is 'voiding the warranty' anyway. - -- Ed Avis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Finger for PGP key -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8sMm1IMp73jhGogoRAjYiAJsGD4B7xY0mkO2jfLiaTkQBf44+FgCfU5pS ucIyRC8xs98OHXWUhFXnNBQ= =bFhe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
