Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On 03/02/2016 12:18 PM, Olivier Mengué wrote: Is 'listdep' just a typo or will we really have both 'listdeps' and 'listdep'? Typo ;)

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

2016-03-02 10:39 GMT+01:00 Peter Rabbitson : > The use case in question is that I am preparing to replace > Module::Install's `perl Makefile.PL && make listdeps` idiom with a > pure-EUMM-based "something else". I was looking for available prior art in order to converge on *naming*. > Given furthe

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On 03/01/2016 09:43 PM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: I am currently aware of the Module::Install-specific targets of `make listdeps` (only what is needed to satisfy test/runtime prereqs) `make listalldeps` (everything the metadata knows about) There is the dzil alternative of: `dzil listdeps`

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

2016-03-01 21:43 GMT+01:00 Peter Rabbitson : > Are there other things out there targeting the same problem-domain? Is > there something approaching a "cross-tooling convention" ? > > > cpanfile-dump https://metacpan.org/pod/distribution/Module-CPANfile/script/cpanfile-dump

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > Is there something for passive (non-installing) listing *besides* the > Module::Install / Dzil examples I showed in the original email? > Does Module::Build offer something similar? > Or "that's about it" ? > >From a side email exchange wi

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > I didn't phrase my question correctly. What I am after is: > > Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball. > Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually checking what is > missing, there is nothing semi-

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On 03/01/2016 11:19 PM, David Golden wrote: On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Peter Rabbitson > wrote: Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball. Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually checking what is missing, there

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball. > Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually checking what is > missing, there is nothing semi-standard that will answer "what do I feed to > | cpanm, so that

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On 03/01/2016 10:14 PM, David Golden wrote: cpanm had --scan-deps, though it's now listed as deprecated. I didn't phrase my question correctly. What I am after is: Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball. Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually check

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

> cpanm had --scan-deps, though it's now listed as deprecated. > > And CPAN has plenty of these sorts of things, eg. Perl::PrereqScanner App::Midgen and the midgen script were designed to determine and list prereqs of different types, in the formats expected by various things: https://m

Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

cpanm had --scan-deps, though it's now listed as deprecated. And CPAN has plenty of these sorts of things, eg. Perl::PrereqScanner On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 3:43 PM, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > I am currently aware of the Module::Install-specific targets of > `make listdeps` (only what is needed

Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

I am currently aware of the Module::Install-specific targets of `make listdeps` (only what is needed to satisfy test/runtime prereqs) `make listalldeps` (everything the metadata knows about) There is the dzil alternative of: `dzil listdeps` (everything) `dzil listdeps --missing