Personally, I'd keep a checklist of steps to take, preferably in some script.

Yep. That's what I do too. And the "script" is almost always called "Makefile". I love make. I use it everywhere. ;-)

Abigail

What concurrency issue?

If you want to be sure that you have the same version of modules on the development box as on the production box, you need to keep local copies somehow. Setting up your own CPAN mirror would also work.

You may not think you'd want this, but there several useful CPAN modules that have occasional backwards-incompatible changes. Hoping you won't run into that isn't nearly as effective as making sure it won't bite you.

Keeping track of which versions you have installed where is the first step to making sure you won't ever have to say: "But it worked on my machine ..." (This is a major complaint I have with a current freelance customer of mine ...)

Personally, I'd prefer to let CPAN do the source-control on those modules and install the specific version of a given module in each place. For example, you could either d/l the correct .tar.gz or do "install XXX 1.234" within the CPAN module.

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

The idea is a little like C++ templates, except not quite so brain-meltingly complicated. -- TheDamian, Exegesis 6

... strings and arrays will suffice. As they are easily available as native data types in any sane language, ... - blokhead, speaking on evolutionary algorithms

Please remember that I'm crufty and crochety. All opinions are purely mine and all code is untested, unless otherwise specified.

Personally, I'd prefer to let CPAN do the source-control on those modules and install the specific version of a given module in each place. For example, you could either d/l the correct .tar.gz or do "install XXX 1.234" within the CPAN module.

That's pretty dangerous! There are people that cleanup their CPAN directories, and only keep the most recent version(s) of their modules there. What if you want to do "install XXX 1.234", and the oldest version of XXX on CPAN happens to be 4.17?

Abigail

Personally, I'd prefer to let CPAN do the source-control on those modules and install the specific version of a given module in each place. For example, you could either d/l the correct .tar.gz or do "install XXX 1.234" within the CPAN module.

The problem with this approach is that you cannot trust CPAN to have that version available. Old modules are deleted on a regular basis by their authors (I certainly do). I have a vague memory of this being a "best practice" documented somewhere, but I can't locate it after five minutes googling so I may be mis-remembering.

Yes, there are things like backpan, but now you have to deal with CPAN, backpan + your own modules. I'm in complete agreement with chromatic, keeping everything in source control makes development much easier IMHO.

My /vendor directory of my current project includes all third party modules, plus perl, apache, mod_perl, openssl, and all other third party code. I want everything that I need to build my project available locally and under source control so that I can access it easily at any point in the future.