Re: Confirming PAUSE operating model safe harbor for Alt::* distributions

2017-10-30 Thread Aristotle Pagaltzis
* David Golden [2017-10-26 14:58]: > What do we think about this? Do we feel it falls under the 'safe > harbor' exception? As far as I can see, the mechanism described by Peter does not permit scenarios in which a user unwittingly gets their Perl installation screwed over by DBIx::Class::Boring.

Re: Confirming PAUSE operating model safe harbor for Alt::* distributions

2017-10-30 Thread David Golden
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote: > >- Per the "explicit user confirmation", I think an explicit opt-in > > must be present, not merely checking for overwriting via hashing. > > I don’t think so, and think it’s fine to not require it. But you didn’t > state a re

Re: Confirming PAUSE operating model safe harbor for Alt::* distributions

2017-10-30 Thread Kent Fredric
On 31 October 2017 at 15:54, David Golden wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 3:11 AM, Aristotle Pagaltzis > wrote: >> >> >- Per the "explicit user confirmation", I think an explicit opt-in >> > must be present, not merely checking for overwriting via hashing. >> >> I don’t think so, and th