On 3/31/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If an installer can't INSTALL under battle conditions, it is failing
> it's primary missing.
Personally I think its worth being a touch more specific with your language.
I dont see Module::Build's job to be to "install". I see its job as
being
>
> A-T requires me to do things differently, and it's that difference that
> introduces the lack of flexibility.
I had a bunch of foo written that I removed, mainly because this is the real
issue, for you I guess - the idea that different is somehow bad or
inflexible, that anyone who creates so
demerphq wrote:
On 3/31/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If an installer can't INSTALL under battle conditions, it is failing
it's primary missing.
Personally I think its worth being a touch more specific with your language.
I dont see Module::Build's job to be to "install". I see
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-31 10:10]:
> Something like dieing on a use warnings statement in the
> makefile or whatever to me constitutes a pre-build failure, not
> an install failure.
`s/installer/build script/gi` on Adam’s post and his points still
stand. The whatever-it’s-called wh
On 3/31/06, Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> demerphq wrote:
> > So it seems to be that you have four (five?) phases:
> >
> > Pre-Build
> > Build
> > Test
> > Install
> > (Post Install Test?)
> >
> > Something like dieing on a use warnings statement in the makefile or
> > whatever to
> Similarly
if somebody has an error in their Build.PL or Makefile.PL are you
going to say that the "installer" doesnt work?
Yes, absolutely.
Adam K
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-31 10:10]:
Something like dieing on a use warnings statement in the
makefile or whatever to me constitutes a pre-build failure, not
an install failure.
`s/installer/build script/gi` on Adam’s post and his points still
stand. The wha
* Adam Kennedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-04-01 04:10]:
> I guess the problem is that in Makefile.PL strictly speaking
> you're not _really_ meant to be doing any building of stuff.
>
> That's supposed to be what you do in make.
>
> So one solution to your problem might be to add something that
>
