Re: Upload a new application

PAUSE account: Yes, you will use the same account.
Name space:I agree (though it's a matter of opinion) that Games::Sudoku::Trainer is better. Nobody owns the Games::Sudoku::* hierarchy, so you don't need to worry about author permission or namespace clashing, from what I can tell. If you want more advice on naming, join and send an email to the module-authors@perl.org mailing list. (On second thought, as I see later on in your post, perhaps App::Games::Sudoku::Trainer.
Versions: If you're talking about dependency version numbers, you may want to install a clean perlbrew Perl version 5.8.9 (for example), and then try installing your app. Also check the Changes file for each of your dependencies to see if you're using some feature, or relying on some bugfix that didn't show up until later in the module's life.
Doku: It doesn't hurt to put some boilerplate POD in each module referring the user to the primary documentation, as well as mentioning the license and author.

One more piece of advice. First, upload it with a "developer's version number" (see perlmodstyle for details). Then watch the CPAN testers reports for a week, and see if it fails under any older versions of Perl that you wish to support. Resolve those issues, and then upload with a full-release version number.

Dave

Comment on Re: Upload a new application Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Upload a new application by marto (Cardinal) on Dec 11, 2013 at 17:46 UTC
To follow up on your perlbrew suggestion to try installing the module for all perls installed: `perlbrew exec perl -MCPAN -e 'install Your::Module::Name'` [download] Here the cpan mirror is local, created by Mini::CPAN, our modules added by mcpani.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: Upload a new application by choroba (Cardinal) on Dec 11, 2013 at 19:00 UTC
Do testers test development releases? I have lived under the impression they don't (IIRC my last development versions). لսႽ† ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ	[reply]
Re^3: Upload a new application by davido (Cardinal) on Dec 11, 2013 at 19:47 UTC
They do. See this distribution as proof. Dave	[reply]
Re^4: Upload a new application by choroba (Cardinal) on Dec 11, 2013 at 19:54 UTC
Thank you. I was probably just unlucky/impatient at that time. لսႽ† ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ	[reply]
Re^2: Upload a new application by GUIfriend (Sexton) on Dec 11, 2013 at 17:41 UTC
Thank you for your detailed reply. It helped a lot. One more piece of advice. First, upload it with a "developer's version number" ... That's what I plan. My tarball is named SudokuTrainer-0.000.001-TRIAL.tar.gz. I will modify the path names in the source, finish the README and then dare my 1st upload.	[reply]
Re^3: Upload a new application by davido (Cardinal) on Dec 11, 2013 at 19:51 UTC
That's not a dev version number. See perlmodstyle - Version Numbering for the relevant details. Your existing version numbering scheme doesn't really even fit into any of the formats listed in that document. There are good reasons related to CPAN indexing for using proper "developer" version strings; the indexers will skip indexing the module, but the testers will still test it. What you have doesn't quite fit what the automated tools expect. Dave	[reply]
Re^4: Upload a new application by GUIfriend (Sexton) on Dec 12, 2013 at 13:01 UTC
That section of perlmodstyle talks about version numbers of modules. Each module in my tarball contains the line `use version; our $VERSION = qv('0.0.1'); # PBP` I think this is ok. The name of the tarball has been created by the Build script in response to my parameter `release_status => 'testing'` in Build.PL. I hope that this is ok too.	[reply] [d/l] [select]