Re: 85-lang-new-hash.patch

[Akim Demaille]

Damian,

You are Cc'ed as the Class::Struct maintainer (?).  We are considering
using Perl 5.6's Class::Struct with Automake, but with perl 5.5 as
highest requirement.  It works fine once you removed most recent 5.6
features which we don't need in Automake.

There are several issues related to this, which we are debating, and
it's now time that you be involved in the debate :)

| On 26 Mar 2001, Akim Demaille wrote:
| > >>>>> "David" == David Lee <address@hidden> writes:
| > 
| > David> Wouldn't it be cleaner to talk with the maintainers of
| > David> Class::Struct with a view to making Class::Struct itself able
| > David> to work on "lesser" versions of Perl?  (And automake could then
| > David> use the Real Thing.)
| > 
| > That was what I originally thought, but they use the module warning
| > which didn't exist AFAICS.  This would mean asking them to step back
| > in their evolution, which is something I wouldn't have liked being
| > asked to do :)
| 
| Thanks for the reply.
| 
| Disclaimer: I have no expertise whatsoever with the internals of automake,
| or of Perl or of any perl module (except a little in Quota). 
| 
| I'm simply an end-user, struggling to make use of things that are out
| there, and to make them work together.  Over the years, I've learned that
| library/module/utility things for distribution should be coded
| "conservatively".  That is, where reasonably possible, go for a low common
| denominator, and try to avoid latest whizz-bang features.  (You'll know
| this yourself, of course, as maintainer of "automake", which is why we are
| agreeing.)
| 
| These features are OK in site-specific, "leaf" applications, but
| troublesome in the branches, trunk and roots of portable systems: and a
| perl module (as with automake) is, by definition, not a leaf... 
| 
| So, e-speaking with no knowledge of the Class::Struct module: 
| 
| 1.  (Technical:) Can we (that is, you or someone who knows the module) 
| produce a relatively clean, relatively simple patch to it, so that it can
| work with earlier versions of perl5 ?

I don't know if maintaining Perl 5.005 is a mission of the Perl team.

| 2.  (Political, diplomatic, etc.:)  If so, then it seems reasonable for
| "us" (that is, you as maintainer of the highly and widely used "automake" 
| package) to ask them, please, to consider this.
|
| > In addition, is there really an author?  It seems, according to the
| > ``ChangeLog'', that each revision was made by different people.  I
| > don't know how the CPAN works.  Should I refer to the Perl dev. team?
| 
| Absolutely no idea!  Perhaps an e-mail to prominent folk in its ChangeLog? 



Basically, AFAIC, my suggestion is to adjust Class::Struct to work
with 5.5, and to ship it with Automake (using a different name, of
course).  Rest assured, authorship will be preserved, but of course it
raises license issues: what is the license you use?  Is it GPL
compatible?

Alternatively, as suggested by David, do you have an official 5.5
compatible latest version of Class::Struct available somewhere?  In
particular, does it support new (%)?  And, same question, can we ship it?