comment on

So have you addressed the responder? That user is the one that had failures in the test. Working on one system (or even one set of systems) does not mean that it is a good patch. That is the reason for cpantesters and the like.

My point is this: the documentation that you have provided does not (IMO) justify taking over the distribution from the original author. Taking over the distribution is a very large mallet when a finishing hammer may be all that is necessary. A single instance of a patch not being applied is not (again, IMO) justification for taking over a distribution.

However, I am not saying that the module should not be taken over. Just that the information you have provided does not justify it, and that there may be a better, less confrontational way of addressing it. Perhaps you have already attempted one or more other methods, but just not demonstrated that you have.

--MidLifeXis

In reply to Re^3: Catalyst::Plugin::Log::Handler - Pinging module author by MidLifeXis
in thread Catalyst::Plugin::Log::Handler - Pinging module author by pjfl

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW
	PerlMonks