Bug #91402 for namespace-autoclean: Unmotivated warning

Fri Dec 13 14:09:54 2013 rurban [...] x-ray.at - Ticket created

Subject:

Unmotivated warning

There is a unmotivated warning in Makefile.PL *** WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING *** If you're seeing this warning, your toolchain is really, really old and you'll almost certainly have problems installing CPAN modules from this century. But never fear, dear user, for we have the technology to fix this! ... But there's no check for an outdated EUMM toolchain Which concludes that only Module::Build is new, and EUMM at all is outdated. In reality it's the opposite. Please don't play stupid politics on uninformed users.

Fri Dec 13 14:14:49 2013 doy [...] tozt.net - Correspondence added

CC:	;
Subject:	Re: [rt.cpan.org #91402] Unmotivated warning
Date:	Fri, 13 Dec 2013 14:14:40 -0500
To:	Reini Urban via RT <bug-namespace-autoclean [...] rt.cpan.org>
From:	Jesse Luehrs <doy [...] tozt.net>

On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:09:55PM -0500, Reini Urban via RT wrote: Show quoted text

> There is a unmotivated warning in Makefile.PL > *** WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING *** > If you're seeing this warning, your toolchain is really, really old and you'll almost certainly have problems installing CPAN modules from this century. But never fear, dear user, for we have the technology to fix this! > ... > But there's no check for an outdated EUMM toolchain > Which concludes that only Module::Build is new, > and EUMM at all is outdated. In reality it's the opposite. > > Please don't play stupid politics on uninformed users.

That's not what this warning means. The "outdated toolchain" warning is because only outdated CPAN clients will try to install using Makefile.PL if there is a Build.PL present. Build.PL should always be preferred if it exists. It has nothing to do with the relative merits of EUMM vs Module::Build (the module uses Module::Build::Tiny anyway, which is not outdated at all). -doy

Fri Dec 13 14:14:49 2013 The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

Fri Dec 13 14:15:23 2013 DOY [...] cpan.org - Status changed from 'open' to 'rejected'

Fri Dec 13 14:39:24 2013 ribasushi [...] leporine.io - Cc RIBASUSHI added

Fri Dec 13 14:41:53 2013 ether [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

There's a few improvements I can make here: "Build.PL should be preferred over Makefile.PL" seems to be more of a heuristic than a hard-and-fast rule, so I've requested that this point be discussed at the upcoming QA Hackathon in Lyon. More recent versions of this generated Makefile.PL only print the annoying warning if configure_requires prereqs aren't satisfied, so I'll re-release this dist to get that update this weekend. rest assured though that the Makefile.PL functions identically to the Build.PL in all other respects (barring any bugs in EUMM or MBT of course), and doesn't print anything if being installed non-interactively, so you are safe to run either file to perform the installation

Fri Dec 13 15:42:48 2013 rurban [...] x-ray.at - Correspondence added

From:

rurban [...] x-ray.at

On Fri Dec 13 14:14:49 2013, doy@tozt.net wrote: Show quoted text

> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 02:09:55PM -0500, Reini Urban via RT wrote:

> > There is a unmotivated warning in Makefile.PL > > *** WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING > > *** > > If you're seeing this warning, your toolchain is really, really old > > and you'll almost certainly have problems installing CPAN modules > > from this century. But never fear, dear user, for we have the > > technology to fix this! > > ... > > But there's no check for an outdated EUMM toolchain > > Which concludes that only Module::Build is new, > > and EUMM at all is outdated. In reality it's the opposite. > > > > Please don't play stupid politics on uninformed users.

> > That's not what this warning means. The "outdated toolchain" warning > is > because only outdated CPAN clients will try to install using > Makefile.PL > if there is a Build.PL present. Build.PL should always be preferred if > it exists. It has nothing to do with the relative merits of EUMM vs > Module::Build (the module uses Module::Build::Tiny anyway, which is > not > outdated at all). > > -doy

my cpan prefer_installer is of course EUMM, because I have a working make. having to deal with broken MB releases on a daily basis is enough, but warning that MB is less broken than EUMM is ridiculous.

Fri Dec 13 16:18:43 2013 ether [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

Subject:	Re: [rt.cpan.org #91402] Unmotivated warning
Date:	Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:18:20 -0800
To:	Reini Urban via RT <bug-namespace-autoclean [...] rt.cpan.org>
From:	Karen Etheridge <ether [...] cpan.org>

Show quoted text

> having to deal with broken MB releases on a daily basis is enough, but warning that MB is less broken than EUMM is ridiculous.

Again, this has nothing to do with Module::Build. This dist does not use Module::Build and I will never willingly ship anything using it. As I said before, later versions of this generated Makefile.PL only check for a working configure_requires, and I will be updating this dist to use that version.

Sat Dec 14 16:14:14 2013 ether [...] cpan.org - Correspondence added

I released 0.15 today which tightens up the heuristics in Makefile.PL (via Dist::Zilla::Plugin::MakeMaker::Fallback 0.005), as well as offering an environment variable for experienced users to bypass the whole thing.

Sat Dec 14 16:14:16 2013 ether [...] cpan.org - Status changed from 'rejected' to 'resolved'

Sat Dec 14 16:14:16 2013 ether [...] cpan.org - Taken

Thu Oct 23 18:01:03 2014 ether [...] cpan.org - Fixed in 0.15 added