On 12/19/2009 12:07 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> Also... Even if we exclude these modules w/o providing them as >> sub-packages, we ought to ensure that they're still pulled in by >> perl-core (and perl itself, when we make the >> perl-core/perl/perl-minimal switch). > > What you say doesn't make sense: > > 1) They are provided as separate modules, by > a) CPAN > b) Fedora packages. Yes, but 1a has always been true, and 1b has been true in the past. We've generally opted to keep the bundled "core" modules as part of the main perl package to keep user and developer expectations sane. If the point is that the base perl modules get outdated, well, we've successfully patched those modules forward when there is a good reason to do so. > 2) Since introducing the package split to "perl", package deps on > perl-packages in general don't make any sense anymore. It's the reason > why we are enforcing BR: perl(xxx). Yes, but perl upstream chose which modules to include with "perl core". If we decide not to package a module, instead deferring to the separated package, we should make sure that the separated package gets installed if someone installs the perl-core metapackage. The way to do that is to add the hardcoded Requires. ~spot -- Fedora Extras Perl SIG http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/Perl Fedora-perl-devel-list mailing list Fedora-perl-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-perl-devel-list
