Re: license in META.yml
* Eirik Berg Hanssen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-04-01T16:30:46] > "Gabor Szabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > now if someone could explain me why did search.cpan put the > > Software::License::Mozilla > > under documentation and not with the rest of the files... > > The same happened to me once. It seems caused by the mismatch of > the the pod NAME (in this case "Software::License::Mozilla") and the > module/package name (in this case "Software::License::Mozilla_1_1"). Thanks, I'll fix that in the next release. -- rjbs
Re: license in META.yml
"Gabor Szabo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > now if someone could explain me why did search.cpan put the > Software::License::Mozilla > under documentation and not with the rest of the files... The same happened to me once. It seems caused by the mismatch of the the pod NAME (in this case "Software::License::Mozilla") and the module/package name (in this case "Software::License::Mozilla_1_1"). Eirik -- Machines certainly can solve problems, store information, correlate, and play games -- but not with pleasure. -- Leo Rosten
Re: license in META.yml
On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Ricardo SIGNES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Gabor Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-31T23:09:09] > > > Maybe there should be a module on CPAN (and maybe even distributed in core > > perl?) that list some of the major licenses *with their full text*. Then > both > > Module::Build and MakeMaker could use a list exported from that module as > the > > authoritative list for the license field. > > Software::License. Have you been sitting in a time machine lately? now if someone could explain me why did search.cpan put the Software::License::Mozilla under documentation and not with the rest of the files... Gabor
Re: RFC: URI::cpan
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 09:00:01PM -0400, David Golden wrote: > Awesome! Now I see what you're getting at. I like the idea of tying > this to META.yml a lot. Several things immediately fall out of that: > * tarballs without META.yml become "badly formed" distributions No. There's nothing badly-formed about something that doesn't have a META.yml. Plenty of stuff on the CPAN pre-dates it, and as recent discussion on this 'ere list have shown, it is poorly specified and documented. -- David Cantrell | Hero of the Information Age What is the difference between hearing aliens through the fillings in your teeth and hearing Jesus in your heart?
Re: license in META.yml
* Gabor Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-03-31T23:09:09] > Maybe there should be a module on CPAN (and maybe even distributed in core > perl?) that list some of the major licenses *with their full text*. Then both > Module::Build and MakeMaker could use a list exported from that module as the > authoritative list for the license field. Software::License. -- rjbs
