On 7/28/05, Chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Andy Lester wrote:
> > I don't think we need another CPAN at all. There's nothing wrong with > > putting "require 6;" at the top of Makefile.PL and keeping everything in > > one happy CPAN. > > That means CPAN is going to have to parse it, and keep a record of the > data so it splits development trees. Module authors will probably > have to maintain dual branches of code between p5 and p6 for at > least one year. I doubt that everyone will be able to jump on the perl6 > bandwagon right away. The data source for the CPAN module MUST restrict listings to latest perl5 version. In fact, maintaining different listings of latest version depending on host version level has been something of an unfunded mandate for some years now AIUI. I doubt CPANPLUS does the trick of restricting upgrade targets to modules compat. with your installation, either -- it would rather go and fetch the latest perl 5 source. -- David L Nicol "This has been your one free extra mile"
