Re: Wrapper for backwards compatibility

--0000000000000755d005be523b8a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I do *not* think this idea is terrible, and I agree that it's better to
pull this stuff out into a more central location.  However, to your primary
question, as a user I think I'd find it a bit confusing if the module's
name started with `ExtUtils::MakeMaker`, which is a well-known package, but
didn't actually live within that package, making it a bit harder to
figure out what to install in order to use it.  So I'd vote for naming it
something with a different prefix.

  -Ken


On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 5:57 PM Pete Houston <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:22:12PM +0100, Leon Timmermans wrote:
> > It sounds like a terrible idea. Most of all I'm not sure what problem
> > that would solve.
>
> The problem is the boilerplate sitting in every Makefile.PL to ensure it
> is backwards-compatible with older EUMM versions. Not a huge problem I
> grant you but certainly a bunch of repeated code like this which ideally
> would be abstracted away into a single location.
>
>         delete $MF{MIN_PERL_VERSION} if $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION <
> 6.48;
>         delete $MF{META_MERGE}       if $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION <
> 6.46;
>         delete $MF{LICENSE}          if $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION <
> 6.31;
>
> etc.
>
> > Writing Makefile.PL by hand is painful, that's why most people (who
> > aren't experts) use tools like Dist::Zilla nowadays.
>
> YMMV. I find writing Makefile.PL by hand to be much less painful than
> using Dist::Zilla.
>
> Pete
> --
> Openstrike - improving business through open source
> https://www.openstrike.co.uk/ or call 01722 770036
>

--0000000000000755d005be523b8a
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">I do *not* think this idea is terrible,=C2=A0and I agree t=
hat=C2=A0it&#39;s better to pull this stuff out into a more central locatio=
n.=C2=A0 However, to your primary question, as a user I think I&#39;d find =
it a bit confusing if the module&#39;s name started with `ExtUtils::MakeMak=
er`, which is a well-known package, but didn&#39;t actually live within tha=
t package, making it a bit harder to figure=C2=A0out what to install in ord=
er to use it.=C2=A0 So I&#39;d vote for naming it something with a differen=
t prefix.<br clear=3D"all"><div><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature" =
data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div>=C2=A0 -Ken</d=
iv></div></div></div><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"l=
tr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 5:57 PM Pete Houston &lt;<=
a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<=
br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8e=
x;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Wed, Mar 24, =
2021 at 10:22:12PM +0100, Leon Timmermans wrote:<br>
&gt; It sounds like a terrible idea. Most of all I&#39;m not sure what prob=
lem<br>
&gt; that would solve.<br>
<br>
The problem is the boilerplate sitting in every Makefile.PL to ensure it<br=
>
is backwards-compatible with older EUMM versions. Not a huge problem I<br>
grant you but certainly a bunch of repeated code like this which ideally<br=
>
would be abstracted away into a single location.<br>
<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 delete $MF{MIN_PERL_VERSION} if $ExtUtils::Make=
Maker::VERSION &lt; 6.48;<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 delete $MF{META_MERGE}=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=
=A0if $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION &lt; 6.46;<br>
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 delete $MF{LICENSE}=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =
=C2=A0 if $ExtUtils::MakeMaker::VERSION &lt; 6.31;<br>
<br>
etc.<br>
<br>
&gt; Writing Makefile.PL by hand is painful, that&#39;s why most people (wh=
o<br>
&gt; aren&#39;t experts) use tools like Dist::Zilla nowadays.<br>
<br>
YMMV. I find writing Makefile.PL by hand to be much less painful than<br>
using Dist::Zilla.<br>
<br>
Pete<br>
-- <br>
Openstrike - improving business through open source<br>
<a href=3D"https://www.openstrike.co.uk/" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_bla=
nk">https://www.openstrike.co.uk/</a> or call 01722 770036<br>
</blockquote></div>

--0000000000000755d005be523b8a--