Re: Best Practices for creating an OO version of an existing CPAN module?

Should I contact the author of the existing module and try to get the OO interface integrated into the existing package?

IMHO Thats the best option. I would get in touch with the author and provide the integration.

If the author does not respond or/and the module has not been maintained in a while you can always ask to take over the maintenance of the module.

Also when providing the options for OO you might want to ensure backward compatibility.

Comment on Re: Best Practices for creating an OO version of an existing CPAN module?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Best Practices for creating an OO version of an existing CPAN module? by topher (Scribe) on Feb 25, 2013 at 21:31 UTC
The module isn't very old old, and the author seems active, so I don't think there will be any issues with getting in touch with him. Trying to maintain maximum compatibility with the existing module will absolutely be a high priority if I OO-ify it. The more similar it is, the easier it will be to maintain and use. Just to clarify, you believe the best option is to integrate the OO interface into the same module as the procedural interface, and not to put it in a separate package? Any particular reason or advantage for this, or just personal preference? Note: I'm not disagreeing with you, just trying to clarify my understanding of the best way forward.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Best Practices for creating an OO version of an existing CPAN module?
by topher (Scribe) on Feb 25, 2013 at 21:31 UTC

The module isn't very old old, and the author seems active, so I don't think there will be any issues with getting in touch with him. Trying to maintain maximum compatibility with the existing module will absolutely be a high priority if I OO-ify it. The more similar it is, the easier it will be to maintain and use.

Just to clarify, you believe the best option is to integrate the OO interface into the same module as the procedural interface, and not to put it in a separate package? Any particular reason or advantage for this, or just personal preference?

Note: I'm not disagreeing with you, just trying to clarify my understanding of the best way forward.

[reply]