Re: Looking for prior art on conventions for dep-listing

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Peter Rabbitson <[email protected]> wrote:

> I didn't phrase my question correctly. What I am after is:
>
> Imagine you get a random checkout of some dist and/or extract a tarball.
> Aside from running `perl Makefile.PL` and visually checking what is
> missing, there is nothing semi-standard that will answer "what do I feed to
> | cpanm, so that prove -l will work".
>
> Hope this makes more sense.
>

The first complication there is that our dependency resolution is
inherently a two-phase process due to configure-requires. The second
complication is that systems like dzil make it a three stage process (and
possibly so do other systems). I agree a better way to deal with this would
be nice, but I don't expect it to look like you want it to look.

Leon