On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 18:24:28 GMT, "Orton, Yves" wrote: >Rafael Garcia-Suarez said on 01 December 2004 18:45 >> Orton, Yves wrote: >> > Im just curious about this. Is there a good reason why the core Win32 >> > modules are NOT considered to be Core perl in general? Are there any >other >> > OS'es where core perl doesn't deploy with what most users of that os >would >> > consider to be standard modules? >> >> You should ask Sarathy, he made most of those decisions regarding Win32 >> packaging (see libwin32 on CPAN.)
I suggest searching the archives for previous traffic on this. >> The only core Win32 module is, so far, Win32 itself. >> >> Moreover I'm not very inclined to add modules in the core. > >Well, 5.6 is long gone. And frankly so even is the company that Sarathy >worked for, at least they are if you want to be picky about it. "Activestate >a division of Sophos" is a different beast to "Activestate, home of the 5.6 >Pumpking". There is probably some truth to this, but I will have you know that I still have an ActiveState.com address and am technically still employed by ActiveState. :) It has been a year or more since I have passed on most my Perl related maintainership responsibilities to Jan Dubois and Gisle Aas. I trust either of them to do justice to everything that deserves it. Sarathy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
