It claims that "Perl is said to be a language for system administration. Could it really be the case that Perl isn't up to the task of building and installing software?" This absolutely grates -- Perl is about text manipulation and system administration, but it's also about gluing existing parts together. If there's a tried-and-true wheel out there, Perl can usually take advantage of it, rather than having to reinvent it. Even if M::B is made to work as well as make at the moment, it will lead to a constant duplication of effort as platforms change, so long as other projects continue to use make, and therefore keep it up-to-date. As it says in the M::B docs, "It is risky to make major changes to MakeMaker, since it does so many things, is so important, and generally works." So on the one hand, there is crufty code; on the other hand, I appreciate its "generally working." (This sounds like a Perl 5/6 comparison in some ways, and I see neither an effort to convert people to Perl 6 by subtle default, nor a cry that they adopt it simply "because it's new".)
For people who need to do elaborate tweaks to the build process, M::B sounds like a definite improvement. But for the rest of us, and certainly for most users of Module::Simple, EU::MM will minimize pain to both author and users.
In reply to Re: Re: Module::Starter, a helper for new module authors
by educated_foo
in thread Module::Starter, a helper for new module authors
by petdance
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |