On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 08:58:15PM +0000, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 12:17:50PM -0800, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote: > > Nevertheless, I find it a little incongruous that a version is not good > > enough to be called stable but is good enough to be included in a perl > > maintenance release :)
I was referring to CPAN there; my memory short circuited and I forgot the other stuff; will look again at it soonish. > I think that of the modules that you listed, only FileCache has been updated > in maintenance by me. I'm attempting to stick to a rule that dual life > modules in stable are identical to CPAN releases. The problem is that > people report bugs to perl5-porters, who apply patches to blead, bump blead's > version to a beta value, and feed the patches back upstream to the author. > And the authors are busy/have real lives/other valid reasons and never get > a chance to make a new CPAN release. Sounds ok for blead. > Which is frustrating. And I'm not sure if there is an elegant way to resolve > this. Lean on the authors to allow others to do updates if necessary? Or keep such changes out of maint. Either isn't so hot an idea :(
