[aur-general] perl prereleases request to make official decision to deviate from general guidleines

[Allan McRae]

On 01/05/10 13:24, Xyne wrote:
>> I'm working on a PKGBUILD for perl 5.12 and I notice that it's
>> providing 20 some odd prerelease modules. I'm annoyed but I can't do
>> anything about it.
>>
>> The general PKGBUILD guidelines say use the same as upstream unless
>> there is a hyphen. so for a perl prerelease of 0.90_1 that guideline
>> follows to release it as exactly the same. However 0.90_1 is == 0.90.1
>> and greater than 0.90 which it is a prerelease for on cpan.
>>
>> I'd like to suggest that for perl the official guideline be to make
>> the version 0.90_pre1
>>
>> Dist::Zilla a release automation tool also allows for using a format
>> _TRIAL which is not yet popular on cpan but does happen should pacman
>> add a _trial ? to the list of options? I think we could just use _pre
>> here too.
>> --
>> Caleb Cushing
>
> See my previous reply to the thread PKGVER (prerelease hell). I agree
> that Arch's CPAN version scheme is flawed (mixing of old and new CPAN
> schemes, failure to understand CPAN schemes (e.g. 0.30 is actually
> 0.300), naïve handling of release versions, etc).
>
> I believe the formatting function that I've written to convert CPAN
> versions to Pacman versions addresses these issues. If you agree and
> decide to use it too, I think we could push harder for CPAN package
> uniformity in Arch to try to clean up the current mess, which is an
> unnecessary source of frustration.
>

The easiest way to clean things up would be to package perl yourselves. 
  There is an advertisement about junior developers on the main page 
so...  Obviously given nothing official has been done towards perl 5.12, 
that might be an area we would consider.