http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=256652


in reply to Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean)
in thread RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML

If you take over a CPAN module that needs help, do you redesign the interface if it needs it? Breaking the interface is considered bad, I think... but sometimes it's too broken to keep.

elusion : http://matt.diephouse.com

  • Comment on Re: Re^3: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(jeffa) 5Re: RFC: New rootlevel CPAN namespace: XHTML (mean)
by jeffa (Bishop) on May 09, 2003 at 17:59 UTC
    I was waiting for someone with more experience in this matter to answer your question ... but since no one has i will share my opinion. Breaking an interface is considered bad, unless no one was using it in the first place. At the very least, instead of simply yanking out API calls and replacing them with new ones, you should instead keep the old calls and 'deprecate' them. By this you could emmit a warning when an old API call is called, telling the module coder to instead use the new API call. Then, after some time has passed, you might get away with yanking out those old API calls.

    The idea is to first give some an indication that certain methods are going to go away -- just don't make the users have to make a trip to the local planning office cellar and have to search by torchlight for a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard" to find out that their favorite API call is being demolished to make way for a new bypass. :D

    jeffa

    L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
    -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
    B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
    H---H---H---H---H---H---
    (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)