> This is something that seems good to me. However, I'm somewhat > perturbed at > your mention of reliance on a another module as a reason against using > something. I'm biased; I'm the maintainer of Class::MethodMaker.
Not trying to insult any author in particular, I have also chosen in several cases not to use existing CPAN modules because they or modules they were dependent upon didn't pass the -w or -T test, or where hugely bloated for what I was doing and therefore ran significantly slower than my code (300% in one case). I feel that both of these are legitimate reasons for shying away from certain CPAN code. If Jay has simply chosen not to use CPAN modules simply because he's biased toward his own code, that is pretty unfair. I think that he should at least take a look at it. I haven't looked at either the Net::ICal or Jay's module but if they are competing for the same user space, perhaps the two maintainers should discuss a collaboration. This could prove to be the best option for all involved, as it could produce a better module then either one alone. small note: The collaboration thing doesn't always work out. It didn't in my case, but I still think it's worth the effort. Grant M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
