Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
go ahead... be a heretic
 
PerlMonks  

Re^2: Build.PL versus Makefile.PL

by DrHyde (Prior)
on Feb 09, 2007 at 10:10 UTC ( #599184=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re: Build.PL versus Makefile.PL
in thread Build.PL versus Makefile.PL

I use EU::MM because I have yet to see any benefits at all that I would get from using M::B. I will continue to use EU::MM until I do, whether it be deprecated or no. To change merely for the sake of fashion - and with no good reason that really is all it would be - would be foolish.


Comment on Re^2: Build.PL versus Makefile.PL
Re^3: Build.PL versus Makefile.PL
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Feb 09, 2007 at 14:45 UTC
      Note that the first link is to a post by M::B's author, and the second basically points to the third, then says "nyah, nyah, I'm only supporting M::B with my modules." Also, as has been stated many times here and elsewhere, these only mention reasons for *authors*, not for *users*. As a user I find M::B a step backwards, and as an author I've never needed its extra features. So if these are the "plenty of good reasons", color me unconvinced.

        Did I hear you volunteer to keep the link to whatever Microsoft calls their free make equivalent up to date so that people who want to install CPAN modules on Windows when they already have Perl installed can do it simply and easily?

        Let me know if you need more advantages of M::B (or, more properly, shortcomings of EU::MM). I could tell you stories about MY::....

Re^3: Build.PL versus Makefile.PL
by blazar (Canon) on Feb 09, 2007 at 15:43 UTC
    I will continue to use EU::MM until I do, whether it be deprecated or no. To change merely for the sake of fashion - and with no good reason that really is all it would be - would be foolish.

    I've not read the rest of the thread, but from a general pragmatic pov, while I agree with the latter claim, I don't on the former one. Also, "fashion" in general may mean all or nothing. Of course it carries the risk of promoting stuff that has no real value to be. But it may also be a good fashion instead. OTOH sticking with something just because "it does" is not a good way to operate. Indeed we should all be still programming with Perl 4 techniques because they did the job, after all...

    Of course if something gets deprecated there may well be a good reason why. One's opinion may differ, and with... ehm... good reasons too. But one cannot assume that in a collectively taken choice all the others will be dumb idiots...

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://599184]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (6)
As of 2014-11-27 05:57 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My preferred Perl binaries come from:














    Results (180 votes), past polls