Em Seg, 2008-12-22 às 15:06 +1100, Timothy S. Nelson escreveu:
> On Sat, 20 Dec 2008, Mark Overmeer wrote:
> > For ???B.  In the current set-up, you use CPAN.pm to download, and then
> > install.  The 'cpan' script is a wrapper around CPAN.pm.  CPAN.pm starts
> > the install tool.  A more convient structure would be to have an user
> > application (maybe the same 'cpan' script), which calls some download
> > backend to retreive the distribution and then calls the right install
> > tool per distribution.  I would say: ???B is "cpan-NG"
>       That would be one way of labelling it.  I prefer to leave that 
> labelling up to the people who will actually be writing the software.  For 
> all 
> I know, they might prefer to begin with a direct port of CPANPLUS, and work 
> from there.

While I agree that ???B plays the role that CPAN.pm does today, I do
think we should leave that to be implementation specific, being the
implementation responsability to provide a minimal set of features in
its package manager so you can install standard Perl modules.

This is important because Parrot compiles its code to bytecode, SMOP
might even always run from source code (since separating compile-time
from run-time may be tricky). Mix together the different Operating
Systems where the module should be installed and you get something that
is not really spec-able.

This also makes it really cool for distribution maintainers, since they
know that they can make a custom package manager to create
distro-specific packages for every Perl 6 implementation.


Reply via email to