Antoine Raillon wrote:
Simple question, what's the best way to correct these ? modifying ebuils
to match new version (and checking some stuff) and then submitting them
to bugzilla assigned to perl@xxx ? or something totally different ?
Forcing CPAN authors to be consistent is the answer ;)
Seriously - the lack of accuracy is because of two factors - module
names not matching download files (like with File::Spec, which now
downloads as PathTools), and a complete lack of consistency in version
numbering schemes. Some authors use a simple X.YZ system, some use
W.X.YZ, and yet others use W.X.vYZ - which isn't always a reflection of
the module's version, or of the name of the exploded tarball. What we
have is as close as we can get, but on that list that was sent AxKit is
a good example of this. The version is really 1.6.2, the author calls it
1.62, but it explodes as something else (at least if memory serves it
was a good example...I could be wrong, but then, AxKit is part of that
family of packages that isn't simple to bump because of interdependencies).
Hope this almost gets close to being a good excuse/explanation :)
~mcummings
--
gentoo-perl@xxxxxxxxxx mailing list
|
