Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the Perl4-CoreLibs CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 56356
Status: rejected
Priority: 0/
Queue: Perl4-CoreLibs

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: doughera [...] lafayette.edu
Cc:
AdminCc:

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



CC: Perl Porters <perl5-porters [...] perl.org>
Subject: Per4-CoreLibs reintroduces chat2.pl and ftp.pl
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 12:18:28 -0400 (EDT)
To: bug-Perl4-CoreLibs [...] rt.cpan.org..zprd.lafayette.edu
From: Andy Dougherty <doughera [...] lafayette.edu>
Perl4-CoreLibs reintroduces two perl4-era libraries deliberately removed from perl5 years ago, namely chat2.pl and ftp.pl. Especially in the case of chat2.pl, I explicitly remember that this was at the request of the author. I think re-distributing it is not a good choice. And I continue to not see the maintenance savings here. -- Andy Dougherty doughera@lafayette.edu
CC: perl5-porters [...] perl.org
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #56356] Per4-CoreLibs reintroduces chat2.pl and ftp.pl
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:25:02 +0100
To: Andy Dougherty via RT <bug-Perl4-CoreLibs [...] rt.cpan.org>
From: Zefram <zefram [...] fysh.org>
Andy Dougherty via RT wrote: Show quoted text
>Perl4-CoreLibs reintroduces two perl4-era libraries deliberately removed >from perl5 years ago, namely chat2.pl and ftp.pl.
Yes, I went with favouring inclusiveness, to help the maximum possible amount of legacy code with upgrading. I did note that these two are not in the current core distro, but failed to find the rationale for their removal, so they're in by default. -zefram
Not a bug.
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #56356] Resolved: Per4-CoreLibs reintroduces chat2.pl and ftp.pl
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:48:28 -0400 (EDT)
To: ZEFRAM via RT <bug-Perl4-CoreLibs [...] rt.cpan.org>
From: Andy Dougherty <doughera [...] lafayette.edu>
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010, ZEFRAM via RT wrote: Show quoted text
> <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=56356 > > > According to our records, your request has been resolved. If you have any > further questions or concerns, please respond to this message.
Sigh. I completely fail to understand why you would choose to distribute code against the wishes of the author. Given such a fundamental disconnect, I can't imagine any productive way forward, so I will not pursue this any further. -- Andy Dougherty doughera@lafayette.edu