On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 10:52:51AM -0800, David E. Wheeler wrote: > On Dec 1, 2009, at 10:46 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote: > > >> Gosh, I didn't know Pod-Simple included those. I'd much prefer it be > >> core, to > >> keep the reference separate from an implementation. (I wouldn't object to > >> Pod-Spec, but I don't think we want to give core one more thing to sync > >> up.) > > > > Core doesn't mind, as long as there's an answer. > > > > (The revised layout of ext, dist and cpan makes this a lot easier. Whilst > > said > > files *are* currently under pod/ they don't have to stay there. I believe > > that > > I can patch it so that the core's build automatically grabs them from the > > appropriate dist dropped into cpan/, and which point it's just as easy to > > keep > > canonical as every other directory in cpan/) > > So are you saying that it should remain in the Pod::Simple distribution?
No, I'm saying that giving "core one more thing to sync up" is not an issue that should affect the decision making. I don't have an opinion on where the right place *is*. I'm perfectly happy for it to be in distributions on CPAN, if that's the right place. Although I note (without investigating) http://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/blob/HEAD:/Porting/Maintainers.pl#l1295 # XXX these two files correspond to similar ones in blead under # pod/, but the blead ones have newer changes, and also seem to # have been in blead a long time. I'm going to assume then that # the blead versions of these two files are authoritative - DAPM 'EXCLUDED' => [ qw( lib/perlpod.pod lib/perlpodspec.pod ) ], so where ever it *does* end up, it looks like there are forks to heal, to get back to one true document. Nicholas Clark
