On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 7:50 PM, Jon Lang <datawea...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:44 PM, Daniel Carrera
> <daniel.carr...@theingots.org> wrote:
> > I think we might need to come up with some sort of standard naming
> > convention to distinguish dependencies. Something that the *user* can
> > recognize quickly when he browses CPAN.
> Why do we need the dependencies to be part of the name?  Perl 6
> provides a rugged versioning system for its modules; we should use it.

I agree entirely with Jon. This sounds like a fruitless idea and outside the
scope of the language.

The only idea that I would give any consideration to would be to extend the
versioning metadata to allow for the user to define new metadata. That
sounds too similar to the goals of XML, but it would at least allow the
community to define what metadata is important.

Some things are best left unsaid.

-Jason "s1n" Switzer

Reply via email to