Makes sense to me to use the latest version. The stuff should work. If not, call it something else. A module's api is important.
You know.. sometimes the old modules are discontinued too. cpan itself suggests to get rid of old stuff. So, if I have Pudding v 0.1, and I'm up to Pudding v4.0, maybe I can remove some of the old 20 pudding distros or so previously released fromthe archive. That seems like the progressive thing to do. I think the poster makes a ton of sense - a version bump up should NOT break stuff- appear like a decay.. etc.
As an author, this stuff can be hard to detect- what of what I am doing is really an improvement to other coders- what's making it worse. With module releases it can be hard to track because we don't by default have download counts etc.
I think the best policy is to give feedback! If it's not working.. come over to perlmonks, and get a group of people to maintain a decent distro of something that's useful.
I think sh1++y maintenance is grounds for a rewrite.
Isn't that the whole point of gnu? Get an old version, and re-release it? Rename it, recognize the original authors, give credit, and you take over. You're not saying it's yours- you're just adding something that the previous author did not or will not add. In this case, it could be that they're breaking the thing's soul.
Shouldn't come to that, though. Ideally you can offer a helping hand and or suggestions. | 