4. Why has Module::Build suddenly decided to affect CPAN without conferring with the module authors list, or the CPAN/PAUSE maintainers, or considering the bigger effects.

Personally I think the answers to these two questions are plain and simply Hubris. They think that its up to them to decide aspects of the future of perl without consultation with as much of the community as possible.

Actually, the answer to #4 is really, really simple. Barbie is on crack. Module::Build has nothing to do with people uploading PPMs to CPAN. Module::Build has some code that attempts to build a PPM. If that code has problems, patches and/or bug reports should be sent. If people are uploading PPMs to CPAN and this is causing problems, then the person doing the uploading should be contacted and/or PAUSE/CPAN should be modified.

As for #3, I don't get that naming scheme myself, but I don't think anyone working on Module::Build did it as some sort of "Perl domination scheme", contrary to your rather fevered imagination. If there's a better (aka more standard and accepted) naming scheme, I'm sure Ken would like a patch, especially considering that he doesn't use PPMs himself.

The paranoia and anger in this whole thread is really wacko. Instead of assuming Ken & co. have some horrible plot, or are motivated by some sort of overwhelming ego, maybe you should consider that Module::Build is still being built, and that for the Win32/PPM side there has been very little input from Win32 people besides Randy Sims and a few others, and basically nothing out of ActiveState. I suspect that those problems Barbie found which are the fault of Module::Build are problems created simply by lack of resources and input.

Have any of the people doing the complaining in this thread actually chimed in on the Module::Build mailing list?