On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 10:04:40AM -0400, Warren Togami wrote: > > Isn't this exactly counter to the logic behind splitting perl into > perl-devel, that ended up angering jpo to the point of him quitting > Fedora? Not exactly, since the split in R-devel would still be there. R would be for end users, but for packagers, this package should not be used. There is another difference, it is that cpan is not in perl-devel, but requires perl-devel. > The rest of this explanation seems to make sense. But does this mean we > make a mistake earlier in the perl split? I don't remember anybody making the same proposal. But I guess that it could be doable to do the same for perl, although more tricky. Maybe the perl meta package could be perl-core + cpan. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
