On 2015-10-14 6:14 AM, Parrot Raiser wrote:
Is this particular change one that could be implemented
algorithmically, or at least partially so?
(E.g. For all modules
check for the presence of a ":D".
If it's there, no action.
If not, insert a line of code. Run a test.
If successful, post change.
If not, alert a human)
I think this can be done, yes, and in principle it would be a good idea.
But the problem Moritz seemed to be raising is that each of the Perl 6 modules
is possibly in different repositories under a wide variety of users, and it
would still count on a lot of people to take action to accept those changes in
order to not have a lot of breaking.
While I agree that changing the modules would be better quality-wise, my
versioning proposal is likely more practical if we're trying to focus on
stability now for a Christmas release.
I mean, this situation seemed to be a solid example of why Perl 6's versioning
scheme exists in the first place, to deal elegantly with things like this.
-- Darren Duncan