Ah, but they aren't. For example, the support for using TT and DBIC with Catalyst is much stronger than using TT and DBIC with CgiApp. Or, using Text::Template and Rose::DB with Mason. And so on. While you can mix'n'match, there are some that work better with each other than with others. Hence, the usefulness of the requested documentation.
I suppose I should remember that it is rarely safe to speak in absolutes. The modules that play better with certain modules than others state that pretty clearly in their documentation, don't they?
Modules that don't play well with others are far less common than those that do.
In reply to Re^3: On the scaleability of Perl Development Practices
by oknow
in thread On the scaleability of Perl Development Practices
by jdrago_999
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |