Mailing List Archive

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 4:47 PM Neil Bowers <neil.bowers@cogendo.com> wrote:

> Hi Sawyer & p5p,
>
> Todd Rinaldo has asked to adopt Gisle Aas’s Digest::MD5 module.
>
> This is a core module, and is also far up the CPAN River — it has nearly
> 13k dependent CPAN distributions.
>
> Todd already maintains a number of high-on-the-river distributions, so I
> don’t see a problem with this, but we should also give others a chance to
> step forward for this, in case there’s an MD5 expert waiting in the
> shadows...
>
> If everyone’s happy with this, I’ll transfer the first-come to P5P and
> give Todd co-maint.
>

No comment on CPAN ownership but this would be a good candidate to bring
into the Dual-Life github org.

-Dan

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 10:46 PM Neil Bowers <neil.bowers@cogendo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Sawyer & p5p,
>
> Todd Rinaldo has asked to adopt Gisle Aas’s Digest::MD5 module.
> This is a core module, and is also far up the CPAN River — it has nearly 13k dependent CPAN distributions.
>
> Todd already maintains a number of high-on-the-river distributions, so I don’t see a problem with this, but we should also give others a chance to step forward for this, in case there’s an MD5 expert waiting in the shadows...

+1

> If everyone’s happy with this, I’ll transfer the first-come to P5P and give Todd co-maint.

+1 from me.

I agree with Dan on Dual-Life org.

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 7:12 PM Sawyer X <xsawyerx@cpan.org> wrote:

> +1 from me.
>
> I agree with Dan on Dual-Life org.
>

What's so attractive about Dual-Life modules ?

I have only negative experiences on that front ... waiting for interminably
long periods of time for the maintainer to approve, then to upload a new
version of the module ... just so that changes can be made to the perl core.
Much better, IMO, if p5p can make the changes immediately to the perl
source, if they see fit.

I guess there must be some argument in support of dual-life.
What is it ?

Cheers,
Rob

On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 3:29 PM sisyphus <sisyphus359@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 7:12 PM Sawyer X <xsawyerx@cpan.org> wrote:
>>
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> I agree with Dan on Dual-Life org.
>
>
> What's so attractive about Dual-Life modules ?
>
> I have only negative experiences on that front ... waiting for interminably long periods of time for the maintainer to approve, then to upload a new version of the module ... just so that changes can be made to the perl core.
> Much better, IMO, if p5p can make the changes immediately to the perl source, if they see fit.
>
> I guess there must be some argument in support of dual-life.
> What is it ?

Having it in p5p core means that both contributors - as well as the
dual-life maintainer - are not necessarily able to apply patches. They
need to submit them and p5p needs to approve and merge. With the
Dual-Life project, we can maintain multiple contributors, like the
module maintainer and p5p.

I'm not objecting to doing it differently, but it can end up being
more convenient for the superset of p5p + non-p5p maintainer.

On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 9:06 AM Sawyer X <xsawyerx@cpan.org> wrote:

>
> Having it in p5p core means that both contributors - as well as the
> dual-life maintainer - are not necessarily able to apply patches. They
> need to submit them and p5p needs to approve and merge. With the
> Dual-Life project, we can maintain multiple contributors, like the
> module maintainer and p5p.
>
> I'm not objecting to doing it differently, but it can end up being
> more convenient for the superset of p5p + non-p5p maintainer.
>

Yes, that seems quite reasonable.
My main concern is that p5p be able to make changes to blead as soon as
those changes have been approved .
And the arrangement you have described sounds satisfactory in that regard.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Rob

I have just transferred first-come on Digest::MD5 to P5P, and given TODDR co-maint.

Neil