Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Think about Loose Coupling


by Anonymous Monk
on May 19, 2005 at 20:06 UTC ( #458763=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option

I checked the Module::Build's bug queue today and unsurprisingly found that 0 new bugs/requests had been added and 0 new comments had been added to existing tickets. There's no new traffic on nor on

There is, however, lots of additional commentary here. I'm not even going to get into the validity of any of it, I'm just going to say this: A POST ON PERLMONKS IS NOT A BUG REPORT. It is not a feature request. It is not a wishlist or todo item. It does not get back to the author. I maintain MakeMaker. I do not normally read Perlmonks. Ken Williams maintains Module::Build. He's not a regular reader of Perlmonks either. Even if we were it puts extra load upon the author to have to mine Perlmonks for nuggets of bugs and feature requests.

IF THE INFORMATION DOES NOT GET BACK TO THE AUTHOR IT IS USELESS. By talking about your likes and dislikes of modules on Perlmonks you are participating in a giant reporting circle jerk. You do not aid or alter the development of the software you use and comment on. It has 0 effect.

I don't really give a crap about people bashing MakeMaker or Module::Build. I do give a crap when folks complain that we're unresponsive or secretive and then I look and see no traffic on the list or in the bug report queue.

REPORT YOUR PROBLEMS TO RT AND THE LIST. If no one answered, report it again. If someone already reported it and nothing's been done about it, throw in a "me, too" so the authors can get an idea of how many people the problem effects. Ken and I are very busy. We maintain some of the most critical CPAN modules. Sometimes it can take use months to fix a bug or add a patch. But if its in the RT queue it means it will not get dropped on a floor and lost.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
by perrin (Chancellor) on May 19, 2005 at 20:55 UTC
    This wasn't intended to be a bug report, wish list, todo item, or message to the authors. It was a request for the users. I understand why "traditional" isn't the default and I'm not asking for it to be changed. I doubt most of the users are on the Module::Build list, but I suppose that's worth a try.

      The Module::Build and EU::MM kits have a problem. They have two kinds of "users", and these two kinds rarely come into contact with each other. The "producers" use the kit to create a distribution, while the "consumers" use the kit to install a distribution. I boldly assume that there are many more "consumers" than "producers". But the support by M::B has not appeared for the "consumers" as of yet. To a "consumer", the extensibility of the module does not matter. The nice structure does not matter. All that matters is that the module gets the distribution installed. If it fails, that reflects badly on the kit. The crux is, that the "consumers" have no interest in the kit. They blame the "producers" for using the wrong kit, but they will not subscribe to the kit-producer-list and will not go out of their way to help the kit-producers as long as there is an alternative kit that does what they want and they can force the "producers" to use that kit.

by schwern (Scribe) on May 19, 2005 at 20:35 UTC
    That, if you couldn't figure it out from DNA tests on the foam frothing out the corners of my mouth, was me.
by holli (Monsignor) on May 19, 2005 at 20:18 UTC
    <yoda> A very good point this is. </yoda>

    holli, /regexed monk/
by Tanktalus (Canon) on May 20, 2005 at 03:31 UTC

    I disagree. Perlmonks can be a bug report if the author happens to be a monk, and happens to have the time to look at it. YMMV. TMTOWTDI. TTFN.

    PS: it's called "attitude". You can be positive or you can be negative. There's no requirement to be positive and a pushover. Not that there's a requirement to be positive. But not only will it help you get what you want (bug reports in a place you can keep track of it), it may get you stuff that you'd really like (help, patches), and it surely will help your blood pressure. Calm down already!

      I agree with you on the need to calm down. But I also agree with schwern's point about rt.cpan and dedicated mailing lists - those and private mail are the only places you can really count on an author seeing the input. I think the way you (Tanktalus) approached it in the node you cited was the best way to do it - you said (paraphrasing) "I've found a problem but I'm not sure which module it applies to, does any monk have some wisdom? If not I'll send a bug report to the author." You were using PerlMonks to its full advantage, gathering the collective wisdom, but you also realized that if you couldn't find an answer here, the right thing to do (for yourself and for me, as the module author) was to contact the module author.

      I was going to stay out of this particular thread, but since I'm here anyway, just let me say to schwern: a) thanks for all of the fantastic work you've done and the many contributions you've made to the Perl community and b) chill out dude, no use getting *your* blood pressure up just because some people like to whinge. (also, it's harder to see the difference between a whinge and valid feedback when your blood pressure is up.)

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://458763]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others avoiding work at the Monastery: (5)
As of 2018-01-23 04:08 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How did you see in the new year?

    Results (238 votes). Check out past polls.