On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 12:12:33PM -0400, Chris Prather wrote: > On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Jesse Luehrs <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 06:04:32PM +0200, Olivier Mengué wrote: > >> I'm Warnocked about my Moose patch. > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma > >> > >> 2012/9/21 Olivier Mengué <[email protected]> > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > From the base.pm > >> > documentation<http://perldoc.perl.org/base.html#DESCRIPTION>: > >> > > >> > > >> > Unless you are using the fields pragma, consider this module discouraged > >> > in favor of the lighter-weight parent . > >> > > >> > From the parent.pm > >> > documentation<http://perldoc.perl.org/parent.html#HISTORY> > >> > : > >> > > >> > This module was forked from base to remove the cruft that had accumulated > >> > in it. > >> > > >> > parent.pm is a 30 lines pure Perl dual module available also in core > >> > since 5.10.1. > >> > > >> > > >> > So I've done the work to replace all "use base" with either "use parent" > >> > or "use parent -norequire => ". Most changes are in lib/Class/ and t/. > >> > The code is here: > >> > https://github.com/dolmen/p5-Moose/commits/topic/base-to-parent > >> > (branch topic/base-to-parent at git://github.com/dolmen/p5-Moose.git) > >> > > >> > I've yet not touched the 'benchmark' directory to avoid breaking > >> > reference > >> > values. Tell me if I should go further... > > > > I'm not sure I see the benefit here, at least as long as we're still > > supporting 5.8. Is there a particular reason you're interested in this > > change? > > Technically we dropped official support a year ago. However we also > stated we wouldn't go out of our way to break 5.8 compat without a > good reason. (I wrote a blog post about it at the time > http://chris.prather.org/future-moose-support.md.html) > > So yeah we'd really need some justification for bumping the minimum > version of Moose from 5.8.3 to 5.10.1 because we have known users who > are still on 5.8.x and it would be a shame to cause them pain for a > change that (seemingly) doesn't provide anything beyond what we > currently have.
parent is dual-life, so it wouldn't be a case of dropping support, it would just be an extra dependency for 5.8. That said, an extra dependency for no actual reason does seem a bit questionable (which is why I was asking for the reasoning). -doy
