Eric Wilhelm wrote:
>> Syntax-wise, I'd rather see something like this:
>>
>> requires:
>> external:
>> svn: 1.4.2
>> mysql: 5.0
>> python: 2.1
>>
>> That way there is no ambiguity about whether a given requires key is a
>> module name or something special. Module names have simple values,
>> special keys have complex values. Then there is no name clash.
>
> Well, using the standard namespace and shipping 'external/svn.pm' means
> the installers don't need an upgrade. (The double-edged sword of
> ad-hoc.)
The nice thing is the two proposals don't cancel each other out. Your
original doesn't even require a change to META.yml, just someone uploading
some CPAN modules.
> The scheme as-described implies the need for an external.pm and some
> sort of API (plus possibly a plugin architecture or registration
> mechanism.)
The scheme is still one of "let the META.yml consumers figure it out". If
they want to reference an external.pm, fine. If they want to look at a local
package database, fine. If they want to ask the user, fine.
The mechanism by which an external dependency is resolved is not META.yml's
problem. META.yml gets the information to the consumer.
--
Life is like a sewer - what you get out of it depends on what you put into it.
- Tom Lehrer
