On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 11:08:13AM -0500, Adekunle Olonoh wrote: > > > I've attached a new module (very small) called CPAN::Grab. > > This is a really great idea. I could've used something like this not > too long ago. >
This could be very useful. > > > - Should MakeMaker be aware of it? > > I think this could be very helpful, except you have to determine how > deep to go. If my module Foo requires Bar and Bar requires Baz, then > will it download Baz too? > > Similarly, what do you think about using CPAN::Grab to also download > prerequisites of the modules you initially specify? This should be > optional of course, but might be helpful as the point is targeting the > bundle for systems that aren't using the CPAN.pm shell. Without CPAN.pm > they loose the functionality of being able to download prerequisites > automatically. > I would like to see the perl MakeMaker install process be able to break the entire installation of the module with its dependencies into separate phases such as download, analysis, build and installation. By integrating the MakeMaker, CPAN and CPAN::Grab in this way, if a dependent module cannot be installed, e.g. a required third-party package is not installed, a clean rollback process is in place and the dependencies are clearly documented. One could also execute only the download and analysis phases to verify the presence of all requirements, too, before attempting a complete installation. I don't believe MakeMaker currently has the hooks built into it for this kind of sophisticated module maintenance. > > > - Is CPAN::Grab is the right name? > > How about CPAN::Bundler? Grab doesn't seem descriptive enough. CPAN.pm > "grabs" modules already, but this module does more than that. > CPAN::Grab would probably be appropriate if such a scheme as I described is attempted because CPAN::Grab would then become a small component of the entire system. Robert Lehr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
