Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
No such thing as a small change

Re^3: RFC: Private CPAN In A Box

by JavaFan (Canon)
on May 21, 2011 at 09:43 UTC ( #906057=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: RFC: Private CPAN In A Box
in thread RFC: Private CPAN In A Box

In my experience, the purpose of a private CPAN is to enable organizations to leverage the CPAN tool chain for managing the dependencies between their own modules and their third-party libraries (i.e. the public CPAN).
But the CPAN toolchain is actually really bad in managing dependencies. Sure, it allows the author to signal a dependency on another CPAN module, but it isn't very suited to do dependencies on non-CPAN modules. OS package systems (including those ported to a range of OSses, like RPM) and distributions systems like cfengine (which allows specifying dependencies based on the role of a box) far superior for that task that CPAN.
Nor does it preclude you from using a more general packaging system (like RPMs) to distribute your code. These are complimentary technologies that fit around a private CPAN.
Pray tell me, if I'm already using RPMs, what additional value does a private CPAN give me?

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://906057]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (5)
As of 2018-06-18 04:32 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Should cpanminus be part of the standard Perl release?

    Results (107 votes). Check out past polls.