Re: [Module::Build] [PATCH] ppm_dist action

[Randy K. <ra...@th...>]

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Randy W. Sims wrote:

> On 1/14/2004 11:09 AM, Glenn Linderman wrote:
[ ... ]
> > I'm assuming that for distribution for PPM users, that I
> > will never need to use "perl build dist"... so the
> > "differing content" in the .tar.gz file build by "dist"
> > vs "ppm_dist" won't annoy me... but will it annoy
> > others, that want to do both types of distributions?
>
> To be honest, I don't have an opinion about this issue. It
> would seem like authors should just know and should test
> each dist before release, so it shouldn't be an issue. I
> don't see any obvious alternative that I like.

There would be a problem with using the same names for the
'dist' and 'ppm_dist' archives if the module author wanted
to make up a CPAN distribution and include the 'ppm_dist'
archive (and associated ppd file) in it, so Win32 users
could just extract the ppd and associated 'ppm_dist' archive
and install it using ppm. What might be an idea is to rename
the 'ppm_dist' archive to, eg, 'Module-Name.tar.gz', and
adjust the codebase reference in Module-Name.ppd accordingly
(remember that you would then have to add these two files to
MANIFEST to get them included in the CPAN 'dist' archive).

-- 
best regards,
randy