John Peacock wrote: > Eric Wilhelm wrote: > > The question may be whether the version.pm / CPAN code is honoring > > your VERSION line correctly. Though, possibly that should be > > qv('v2.4.0'). John? > > I'd have to know what release of CPAN you are using, since those two > version objects are equivalent. > > > If it compares a version object to your META.yml, I think that should > > be good. If it is doing a string-compare, I think all bets are off. > > Andreas has been very good about making sure that CPAN and PAUSE work > with version objects, so I suspect it is actually a back-versioned CPAN > rather than Module::Build.
Nope, my complainant tells me he is running CPAN.pm 1.9101, which appears to be the latest version. Did I get it right that CPAN.pm doesn't yet use version.pm for version number comparisons? If that's the case then I wonder why `r` ("reinstall recommendations") in `cpan` on my system (CPAN.pm 1.76_02, Perl 5.8.8) does NOT list Mail::SPF as being out of date, even though I have the exact same version of Mail::SPF installed as the complainant (2.004), and my CPAN.pm is even older than his. Has CPAN.pm's version comparison behavior changed since 1.76_02? Julian.
pgpNrwD4jOxRj.pgp
Description: PGP signature