From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63751 invoked by alias); 7 Jul 2016 15:46:01 -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 63726 invoked by uid 89); 7 Jul 2016 15:46:00 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=mainstream X-HELO: plane.gmane.org Received: from plane.gmane.org (HELO plane.gmane.org) (80.91.229.3) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 15:45:59 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bLBUq-0004yr-Ul for cygwin-apps@cygwin.com; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 17:45:49 +0200 Received: from 217.10.52.10 ([217.10.52.10]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 17:45:48 +0200 Received: from Stromeko by 217.10.52.10 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 17:45:48 +0200 To: cygwin-apps@cygwin.com From: Achim Gratz Subject: Re: perl-5.24? Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 15:46:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <919f1d39-a69c-329f-d7bb-a58828a1fa2e@cornell.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/) X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2016-07/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 Ken Brown writes: > I'm wondering whether you have plans to update perl to 5.24. The biber > developer has just announced that the next version of biber will require > it because "they have the postfix dereference notion officially > supported and I can get rid of the the horrible circumfix operator syntax". I was trying to keep things stable for a while and then maybe go straight for 5.26.x when it becomes mainstream. I would only want to switch to 5.24 in the next half year or so if I can keep it binary backwards compatible, so we don't have to another massrebuild of all dependent packages. I haven't started to look into that, though. Regards, Achim.