I'll just inject a note of caution here again though. Debian deals with binary packages, CPAN deals with source packages.
There's a few very important differences between the fundamental graph structures caused by this, that means while a lot of the policy and logic is great, it can be a mistake to just take implementations directly from them (as one example of a design for 6CPAN did). Adam K On 21/11/2007, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While the whole "requires: perl" thing goes on about META.yml, its > important > that folks understand the underlying source material that META.yml draws > its > design from: the Debian Policy Manual. > http://www.us.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ > > Whether not you like using Debian, they've got their shit together when it > comes to managing a large, comprehensive, contributor-developed, > dependency-resolving package repository (sound familiar?) and have a great > packaging format. And they have piles and piles of documentation about > it. > It's worth reading, they've been doing this for over a decade and they do > it well. > > > -- > ROCKS FALL! EVERYONE DIES! > http://www.somethingpositive.net/sp05032002.shtml > >
