On Sunday 28 July 2002 02:52, Johan Vromans wrote: > > On Fri, 26 Jul 2002 13:19:51 -0700, Johan Vromans wrote: > > This idea appeals to me, but I have thought of two drawbacks. The first > > is minor, and it's that I don't think Test::Builder should have special > > logic for installation. It seems that this would be better in CPANPLUS. > > It could then be something more modules would be able to use.
> Just for the sake of completeness: this is a non-issue in case of an > CPAN or CPANPLUS install. Since Test::* is specified as a requirement > this will be handled automatically. > The case I aimed at is the case where a package is installed > standalone (i.e., without CPAN(PLUS)). I agree that in this case it is > better to just use the bundled version instead. Perhaps we are looking at this from the wrong direction. Instead of installing bundled modules, perhaps a shell should be able to specify that certain dependencies are available only for testing. That way, users wouldn't necessarily have to install Test::Builder and Test::Builder::Tester and so forth in the public directories. That doesn't sound completely right either. Johan, there's a real problem here you've identified, but I can't quite put my finger on what it is! -- c
