FAQ
14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive

Proposal:

Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'build_requires'.
Instead, the spec should define which combinations of categories should be
available at which stages of the install process. (Dagolden)

The exception would be 'conflicts', which by its nature should be a
duplicate of a module listed elsewhere in the prerequisite structure.

Comments:

* This would be less work for users and less prone to stupid processing
errors -- like generating a list of ''all'' requirements and then
subtracting 'build_requires' (Dagolden)

* I think this would remove a certain amount of useful flexibility,
standard light weight "META Object" modules could easily automate the
production of the merged list. This feels like sacrificing on a
fundamental point to make life easier when you don't have tools that
haven't been written yet --Adam K

Search Discussions

  • Ricardo Signes at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:05 pm
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:48:50]
    14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
    No vote, no strong opinion.

    --
    rjbs
  • Graham Barr at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:48 AM, David Golden wrote:
    14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive

    Proposal:

    Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
    E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
    'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'build_requires'.
    Instead, the spec should define which combinations of categories
    should be
    available at which stages of the install process. (Dagolden)
    I do not see the benefit of forcing such a requirement.

    -1

    Graham.
  • David E. Wheeler at Oct 9, 2009 at 5:27 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 6:55 AM, Graham Barr wrote:

    Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite
    categories.
    E.g. a 'requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'test_requires'; a
    'configure_requires' module shouldn't be listed in 'build_requires'.
    Instead, the spec should define which combinations of categories
    should be
    available at which stages of the install process. (Dagolden)
    I do not see the benefit of forcing such a requirement.

    -1
    -1

    David
  • Steffen Mueller at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:23 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
    * I think this would remove a certain amount of useful flexibility,
    standard light weight "META Object" modules could easily automate the
    production of the merged list. This feels like sacrificing on a
    fundamental point to make life easier when you don't have tools that
    haven't been written yet --Adam K
    -1

    What Adam said.

    Steffen
  • Ruslan Zakirov at Oct 9, 2009 at 9:55 pm

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:48 PM, David Golden wrote:
    14. Prerequisites should be mutually exclusive
    -1

    we have at least one case where runtime requires one version and tests
    require different version

    --
    Best regards, Ruslan.
  • Zefram at Oct 10, 2009 at 10:46 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    Modules should only be listed once across all prerequisite categories.
    Strongly opposed. It's possible for a single module to be required in
    more than one phase, possibly for independent reasons and possibly with
    different minimum versions. If the module must be listed only once then
    the dependencies that an install tool must gather for one of the phases
    would have to implicitly include all the dependencies listed for the
    other phase. It would grossly compromise the separation of phases.

    -zefram

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-workers @
categoriesperl
postedOct 9, '09 at 11:49a
activeOct 10, '09 at 10:46p
posts7
users7
websitecpan.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase