That scenario doesn't seem right. A mere deletion of a .pm file in a future release aught to be the tripwire for such a warning. An explicit namespace clearance is much more dire. On 25/03/2016 11:51, "Neil Bowers" <neil.bow...@cogendo.com> wrote:
> I wonder what the volume in one case vs the other is. Maybe the attempt > to distinguish the cases is premature optimisation that can be skipped? > (Hopefully so, but I don’t know.) > > > I suspect you’re right, and we should start off with everything, and only > worry if it seems too noisy. > > One optimisation we might consider including from the start: > > Alert if an indexed release is scheduled for deletion, unless there’s a > higher version of the same dist already indexed. > > > This would prevent the klaxon going off in the case where Foo-Bar-1.01 > included Foo::Bar::Error, which was changed to Foo::Bar::Exception in 1.02. > With both releases in your author directory, both Foo-Bar-1.01 and > Foo-Bar-1.02 will appear in 02packages, with Foo-Bar-1.01 only appearing > against Foo::Bar::Error. > > Thinking about it, it should probably still be alerted on, just on the > off-chance that the rug *is* getting pulled from under someone else, but > it could be flagged as this “possible module renaming” case. > > Neil > >
