Re: perl 5.6 dependent packages
Jérôme Marant wrote:
> > As far as retaining the stand-alone versions of [now] uninstallable perl
> > modules in the archive goes, is there any point? They can be re-packaged
> > if/when the need arises.
> It depends on the will of the maintainers of those packages.
> Those modules are likely to have newer versions in the upcoming months,
> maybe users will be interested in newer versions?
And we could separatly package the source to almost every kernel driver
too. But there's really often not much point; it is a lot of work for
both the maintainer and for users and it bloats the archive. Instead
newer versions or backports of only a very few in-kernel drivers are
packaged when it is really necessary.
There are a ton of third-party (if that term means anything here)
modules in perl now, 5.8 just adds a few more really and I have not seen
any real desire that all the other modules be packaged separatly.
Instead I expect that the maintainers of most were happy to not have to
do the work, and to know that their module would be well integrated into
the perl core and tested before new perl releases.
After all, perl does have a fairly reasonable release frequency, and
Important New Features are not added to existing modules all that often.
see shy jo