From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30025 invoked by alias); 3 May 2014 02:06:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Sender: cygwin-apps-owner@cygwin.com List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Received: (qmail 28263 invoked by uid 89); 3 May 2014 02:05:58 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: limerock01.mail.cornell.edu Received: from limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (HELO limerock01.mail.cornell.edu) (128.84.12.99) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 03 May 2014 02:05:56 +0000 Received: from limerock04.mail.cornell.edu (limerock04.mail.cornell.edu [128.84.12.60]) by limerock01.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4_cu) with ESMTP id s4325sZC018161 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 22:05:54 -0400 X-CornellRouted: This message has been Routed already. Received: from authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (granite3.serverfarm.cornell.edu [10.16.197.8]) by limerock04.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4_cu) with ESMTP id s4325r9f024285 for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 22:05:54 -0400 Received: from [172.16.176.235] (209-255-149-194.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.149.194]) (authenticated bits=0) by authusersmtp.mail.cornell.edu (8.14.4/8.12.10) with ESMTP id s4325n0f003530 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 2 May 2014 22:05:52 -0400 Message-ID: <53644EFC.1090703@cornell.edu> Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 02:06:00 -0000 From: Ken Brown User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com Subject: Re: perl-5.18.2-1 References: <534078A2.4000601@tiscali.co.uk> <87bnwf2cjl.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <534174C4.5010608@tiscali.co.uk> <87y4zi1kib.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <5341A3F5.2040506@tiscali.co.uk> <8761mlx7im.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87a9bvsnse.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <8761loegk8.fsf_-_@Rainer.invalid> In-Reply-To: <8761loegk8.fsf_-_@Rainer.invalid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-05/txt/msg00005.txt.bz2 On 5/2/2014 4:21 AM, Achim Gratz wrote: > Reini Urban writes: >> It's vastly easier to keep perl_vendor than to split it up. > > I've been looking at the test package for the upcoming 5.18.2 release > announced in http://cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-announce/2014-04/msg00038.html > and I'd like to contest that assertion again. > > TL;DR: I still propose to keep each Perl distribution as a separate > package (yes, I'm willing to ITP them) +1 > and move perl_vendor to an > umbrella package that simply bundles those individual packages plus > perhaps a README. I'm not even sure that such an umbrella is needed. Maintainers of packages that rely on Perl modules can simply use cygport to determine which perl-* packages are required. I don't see the need for a perl_vendor package that brings in some arbitrarily chosen collection of Perl modules. Reini, I know you think it's more work to split up perl_vendor than to keep it as is, but Achim has offered to do the work. And it would make things much easier for those of us who maintain packages that require Perl modules. With the current bundling, we have to check for each required module whether or not it's included in perl_vendor. I just did this for biber, and it's very tedious. I hope you'll reconsider. Ken