On Nov 25, 2007, at 9:12 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
On 25/11/2007, Ken Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Nov 19, 2007, at 3:59 AM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
>
> I for one think "recommends" is a stupid idea, since it's
> completely ambiguous and doesn't add anything of interest to the
> toolchain
The same could be said for 'abstract', but that doesn't make it
useless.
It's just an advisory statement to the user that functionality will
be somehow enhanced if these other things are installed. How the
user or their tools deals with that information is up to them.
That would seem to be something of a cop out.
A cop out for what? Either we have a place to put this information,
or we don't have any place to put it and it never gets communicated.
There are a bunch of modules that can do "extra stuff" if you have
certain modules installed. Given the dynamic nature of Perl and
Perlers, I think that will always be the case. This just captures
that information and
We're giving users (most of the tools hand off to the users
themselves) options and decisions to make without necessarily
equipping them with the ability to make those decisions.
If people are using M::B, they can turn the optional dependencies
into auto_features instead, which do carry descriptions of what
difference it would make if they had the extra stuff installed. It
will still show up in the META.yml as 'recommends' though, which I
think is the right thing to do.
-Ken
