On 9/22/07, Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My understanding is that "no_index" is only useful when "provides" > isn't there and an indexer has to guess what you provide. When > "provides" is there, it should be exhaustive. Note that the spec > says "indexers will usually trust the C<provides> field if it's > present." That's just a recommendation from me to the owners of the > indexers, but I think it's one they follow. > > So in Schwern's case, "provides" should indeed win, and furthermore > you should be able to just remove "no_index" altogether.
If you're saying that if "provides" is there, indexers should *only* index those and not do any other searching? I don't think that's the case for search.cpan.org, as I seem to recall that failing to include "inc" or "examples" directories in no_index wind up with them being indexed for .pm files. "t" directories are ignored, I think, but that's it as far as I know. Time permitting, I suggest that the META.yml spec be updated with some tighter "must", "should", "shouldn't" kind of language to make these kinds of cases more explicit. Regards, David
