On 11/25/07, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What you are suggesting is a NEW approach that has, as part of the design, > the explicit intent to break compatibility.
I'm not sure how else to say this, but there is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in what I've proposed that would break backwards compatibility. I'm saying this SO EMPHATICALLY because it's the WHOLE POINT of the proposal. If we broke backwards compatibility, that would mean that something that works now in a META.yml document would no longer work (or would mean a different thing) when interpreted under the new spec. If you see something like this, please tell me, but I don't see it. By contrast, the proposal of creating a perl_requires top-level key DOES BREAK backwards compatibility for no apparent real gain, which is precisely why I'm against it. -Ken
