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

Reply via email to