Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the Parse-BACKPAN-Packages CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 55595
Status: rejected
Priority: 0/
Queue: Parse-BACKPAN-Packages

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: mjd [...] plover.com
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: (no value)
Fixed in: (no value)



Subject: Too many dependencies
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 11:16:19 -0400
To: lbrocard [...] cpan.org, bug-Parse-BACKPAN-Packages [...] rt.cpan.org
From: Mark Jason Dominus <mjd [...] plover.com>
Parse::BACKPAN::Packages should not require DBIx::Class::Schema::Loader, which then pulls in 50 more dependencies. http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=Parse::BACKPAN::Packages;perl=latest Mark Jason Dominus mjd@plover.com
On Mon Mar 15 11:17:35 2010, mjd@plover.com wrote: Show quoted text
> Parse::BACKPAN::Packages should not require > DBIx::Class::Schema::Loader, which then pulls in 50 more > dependencies. > > http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=Parse::BACKPAN::Packages;perl=latest
Thank you for your report [1], but is this causing an actual problem? You may not be aware that Parse::BACKPAN::Packages is deprecated. It was slow and inflexible. BackPAN::Index is its replacement, Parse::BACKPAN::Packages has been reimplemented as a wrapper. BackPAN::Index is faster and far more flexible than PBP. DBIx::Class makes it so and accounts for over 30 of those deps. Without DBIx::Class there is no module. DBIC::Schema::Loader is not strictly necessary, but it keeps me from having to maintain redundant DBIC schema definitions. According to the CPAN deps report, all the deps are in good working order. namespace::clean is a little shaky but its not a critical failure and I'm sure they'll work it out. BackPAN::Index should install fine from a CPAN shell. http://deps.cpantesters.org/?module=BackPAN::Index;perl=latest https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=54483 I didn't think it worth preserving PBP in its original form. If you wish to do so, I can give you the PAUSE keys for PBP and you can split it out into its own dist and pre-BackPAN::Index form. Otherwise I suggest converting any existing PBP code to use BI. [1] What I originally wrote was "WHAT THE HELL KIND OF REPORT IS THAT, MARK?!"