|
Fire is step THREE! | github.com/perl6/toolchain-bikeshed | Channel logs: irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-toolchain/today | useful prior art: metacpan.org/pod/CPAN::Meta::Spec Set by moderator on 21 January 2016. |
|||
|
01:50
ribasushi joined
|
|||
| jdv79 | i think we could structure that better, no? | 03:04 | |
| ugexe | everything else is already structured. it leaves 1 spot for an arbitrary structure of anything external tools might look at | 03:45 | |
|
07:29
domidumont joined
07:32
FROGGS joined
07:36
domidumont joined
11:42
ilbot3 joined
|
|||
| moderator | Fire is step THREE! | github.com/perl6/toolchain-bikeshed | Channel logs: irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-toolchain/today | useful prior art: metacpan.org/pod/CPAN::Meta::Spec | ||
|
11:59
leont joined
|
|||
| ranguard | hi | 12:01 | |
| raw.githubusercontent.com/perl6/ec.../META.list lists p6-Foo-v1.0.0 and p6-Foo-v1.2.0 - but modules.perl6.org/repo/Foo doesn't offer disambiguation - discuss :) | 12:04 | ||
| ranguard was actually looking for a senario of 2 authors having the same name'd module, rather than same author with 2 versions | 12:05 | ||
| flussence has a package on there with two versions of the same module inside, and afaik one just vanishes on install... | 12:16 | ||
| seems like CURLI is the only part of the stack that takes module versioning seriously right now | |||
| ranguard | and 2 'auth' releasing the same module name? | 12:18 | |
| ranguard still thinks it's madness | 12:19 | ||
| nine | It's really hard to say in advance how this feature will play out in reality | 13:49 | |
| jdv79 | ranguard: what are you using modules.perl6 for? | 14:11 | |
| ugexe | i dont see any problems with auth/ver etc and multiple packages. if you consider `use Foo::Barr;` bar form and insist people be explicit ala `use Foo::Barr:auth<cpan:xxx>` its easier to digest | 15:02 | |
| s/bar form/bad form/ | |||
| lizmat | and a new Perl 6 Weekly hits the Net: p6weekly.wordpress.com/2016/01/25/...waiting-4/ | 15:15 | |
| for some reason, some "f"'s are not rendering, although they *are* in the source | 15:16 | ||
| I blame wordpress JS madness | |||
| commute to AmsterdamX.pm meeting | 15:17 | ||
| & | |||
| oops ww :-( | 15:18 | ||
| ranguard | jdv79: an example of 2 authors releasing a module of the same name | ||
| nine: yea, that's part of my issue | 15:19 | ||
| ugexe: so I release Foo::Barr:authLLAP and everyone hard codes that, then I want to pass it on to someone else to maintain, now every has to update to Foo::Barr:authOTHER... OR I release everything with a unique author that I can then pass on to someone else | 15:21 | ||
| ugexe | see: s22 superedes, superceded_by, augments, excludes | 15:22 | |
| design.perl6.org/S22.html#emulates (and the couple headings under it) | 15:23 | ||
| ranguard | ugexe: so I run a bit of code on one box that has Foo::Barr:authLLAP.. it works, I deploy to a box with Foo::Barr:authOTHER that superedes Foo::Barr:authLLAP and shit breaks but I have to look through meta files to work out what's acutally being used? | 15:26 | |
| ugexe | the thing is they should also be putting the :ver<xxx> as well (not just the auth). so in most cases you would be hard coding *something* | ||
| ranguard | or am I misunderstanding? | ||
| ugexe | you can see which one is being used with RAKUDO_MODULE_DEBUG=1 | ||
| but again, i think ver and auth should both be explicit if you want to avoid any type of auto-pick madness | 15:27 | ||
| i will say i dont think anyone has any idea how that aliasing will end up working | 15:28 | ||
| ranguard | heh, all feels a bit too clever to me | 15:29 | |
| ugexe | the more time that passes, the more the things in s22 make sense to me | 15:30 | |
| ranguard hasn't got a big enough coffee mug to really process it, I guess I need to set some time asside to really review | 15:31 | ||
| ugexe | so it might be overly clever for a reason (or stockholm syndrome has set in after a few years) | ||
| nine | my first reaction was thinking over engineering, too, but then I came across use cases at work where a those power tools really would have been nice | 15:37 | |
| S22 does come from experience with real world code bases. | 15:38 | ||
| ugexe | yeah. s22 is over-engineered but i think its one area that may have to be | 15:40 | |
| jdv79 | i'm not convinced its clean enough but still working out why | 16:20 | |
|
16:46
leont joined
17:26
Kassandry joined
|
|||
| b2gills .oO( Sometimes you have to over-engineer something to find the right level of engineering ) | 18:04 | ||
| jdv79 | grow it then trim it | 18:07 | |
|
18:11
FROGGS joined
18:47
domidumont joined
|
|||
| [Coke] | b2gills: it's very hard to do only the right amount of work! | 18:49 | |
|
18:54
ugexe joined
18:59
domidumont1 joined
21:36
autarch joined
22:52
leont joined
|
|||