FAQ
29. Language

Proposal:

Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to reinvent
the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an optional field
with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse

Comments:

* At this time, META.yml is specifically oriented around Perl 5. To suppose
multiple languages, much more than just a language flag would need to be
changed. --Adam K

Search Discussions

  • Ricardo Signes at Oct 9, 2009 at 1:19 pm
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:54:51]
    29. Language

    Proposal:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to reinvent
    the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an optional field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    Strongly agreed.
    * At this time, META.yml is specifically oriented around Perl 5. To suppose
    multiple languages, much more than just a language flag would need to be
    changed. --Adam K
    We can keep revising as needed.

    --
    rjbs
  • Graham Barr at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:32 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 8:19 AM, Ricardo Signes wrote:

    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:54:51]
    29. Language

    Proposal:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to
    the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure
    we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to
    reinvent
    the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an
    optional field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    Strongly agreed.
    +1

    Graham.
  • David E. Wheeler at Oct 9, 2009 at 10:17 pm

    On Oct 9, 2009, at 7:31 AM, Graham Barr wrote:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to
    the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the
    structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to
    reinvent
    the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an
    optional field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    Strongly agreed.
    +1
    +1
  • Steffen Mueller at Oct 9, 2009 at 2:52 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    29. Language

    Proposal:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to reinvent
    the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an optional field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    I'm very strongly opposed to the implicit value at least. We can not
    trust that the perl6 tools (and most importantly the humans using them)
    will always DTRT. A wrongly indexed package in a different language can
    cause a fair bit of mayhem. Instead, we should make this mandatory.
    Remember that we're inventing a new spec. We can make things mandatory
    if necessary.

    Cheers,
    Steffen
  • David Golden at Oct 9, 2009 at 9:00 pm

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Steffen Mueller wrote:
    David Golden wrote:
    29. Language

    Proposal:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN.  A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we
    need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to reinvent
    the whole thing.  My recommendation would be that this be an optional
    field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    I'm very strongly opposed to the implicit value at least. We can not trust
    that the perl6 tools (and most importantly the humans using them) will
    always DTRT. A wrongly indexed package in a different language can cause a
    fair bit of mayhem. Instead, we should make this mandatory. Remember that
    we're inventing a new spec. We can make things mandatory if necessary.
    Agreed. If the point of this is to identify perl5 vs perl6 stuff that
    slips on CPAN, then defaulting to 'perl5' does't help.

    The perl5 toolchain can fill in the mandatory part for us, so authors
    won't have to bother.
  • Tim Bunce at Oct 9, 2009 at 3:53 pm

    On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 07:54:51AM -0400, David Golden wrote:
    29. Language

    Proposal:

    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN rather than to try to reinvent
    the whole thing. My recommendation would be that this be an optional field
    with an implicit value of 'perl5' --Jesse
    While perl6 is arguably a different language from perl5,
    isn't perl5.10 arguably a different language from perl5.0?

    I don't object to a language field, but I think minimum version numbers,
    no matter how major, belong elsewhere.

    Tim.
  • David Golden at Oct 9, 2009 at 9:01 pm

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
    While perl6 is arguably a different language from perl5,
    isn't perl5.10 arguably a different language from perl5.0?

    I don't object to a language field, but I think minimum version numbers,
    no matter how major, belong elsewhere.
    Through historical precedent, this already is in use:

    requires:
    perl: 5.006

    I wouldn't have designed it that way, but CPAN/PLUS now handle it
    appropriately, so I say leave it alone.

    David
  • Ricardo Signes at Oct 10, 2009 at 2:32 am
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:54:51]
    29. Language
    Branch available: http://github.com/rjbs/cpan-meta-spec/commits/29-language

    --
    rjbs
  • David Golden at Oct 10, 2009 at 10:59 am

    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Ricardo Signes wrote:
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:54:51]
    29. Language
    Branch available: http://github.com/rjbs/cpan-meta-spec/commits/29-language
    Good start. I'd like to see a list of "known" names, even if just
    "perl5" and "perl6"and some explanation as to why the field exists
    (i.e. people uploading perl6 modules to CPAN)

    David
  • Ruslan Zakirov at Oct 11, 2009 at 3:41 pm
    Hello,

    As we have "requires:perl:5.xxx" then may be it's better to use
    "language: perl" and describe in the spec that in requirements there
    may be record matching language name that defines minimal version for
    the language. Something like that.
    On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 2:59 PM, David Golden wrote:
    On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Ricardo Signes
    wrote:
    * David Golden [2009-10-09T07:54:51]
    29. Language
    Branch available: http://github.com/rjbs/cpan-meta-spec/commits/29-language
    Good start.  I'd like to see a list of "known" names, even if just
    "perl5" and "perl6"and some explanation as to why the field exists
    (i.e. people uploading perl6 modules to CPAN)

    David


    --
    Best regards, Ruslan.
  • Zefram at Oct 11, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    David Golden wrote:
    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN
    We certainly need something in this direction. We should be clear
    that each language has its own namespace for modules. We should also
    have a way to specify language as part of a dependency name, to manage
    cross-language dependencies. Doing those suggests that language could
    be consistently stated in META as part of the module name, rather than
    needing a separate field.

    -zefram
  • David Golden at Oct 11, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 10:41 AM, Zefram wrote:
    David Golden wrote:
    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN.  A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN
    We certainly need something in this direction.  We should be clear
    that each language has its own namespace for modules.  We should also
    have a way to specify language as part of a dependency name, to manage
    cross-language dependencies.  Doing those suggests that language could
    be consistently stated in META as part of the module name, rather than
    needing a separate field.
    I think that's out of scope for this change. We need to fix
    limitations of current META, not solve the broader CP6AN problem.

    -David
  • Jarkko Hietaniemi at Oct 11, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    Zefram wrote:
    David Golden wrote:
    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN
    We certainly need something in this direction. We should be clear
    that each language has its own namespace for modules. We should also
    have a way to specify language as part of a dependency name, to manage
    cross-language dependencies. Doing those suggests that language could
    be consistently stated in META as part of the module name, rather than
    needing a separate field.

    -zefram
    And what should distributions with a mix of languages do?
  • Tim Bunce at Oct 12, 2009 at 5:19 am

    On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 01:44:16PM -0400, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
    Zefram wrote:
    David Golden wrote:
    Perl 6 is coming. Some code in Perl 6 is already being uploaded to the
    CPAN. A new "language" field is an important part of the structure we need
    to allow Perl 6 to reuse the existing CPAN
    We certainly need something in this direction. We should be clear
    that each language has its own namespace for modules.
    But does each language have its own namespace?

    The perl6 namespace is richer "under the covers", what with authorities
    and the like, but from the simple users perspective of "use Foo;" I
    think they can be viewed as sharing the same namespace.
    We should also
    have a way to specify language as part of a dependency name, to manage
    cross-language dependencies. Doing those suggests that language could
    be consistently stated in META as part of the module name, rather than
    needing a separate field.
    And what should distributions with a mix of languages do?
    An important question.

    There will come a time when distribution authors will likely want to mix
    perl5 and perl6 code and it's important that the tools enable that.

    We already have "requires:perl:5.xxx" to express the minimum required
    perl version.

    I'm strongly -1 for a Language field that implies a language version.
    I think it's a distinction we'd regret in the long term.

    Tim.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-workers @
categoriesperl
postedOct 9, '09 at 11:55a
activeOct 12, '09 at 5:19a
posts15
users9
websitecpan.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase