perl-5.9.5

[Reini Urban]

Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes schrieb:
> On Wed, June 20, 2007 11:18 pm, djh wrote:
>>> Since 5.9.5 is basically a beta 5.10.0, I would actually make it
>>> a test version of a new perl5.10 package (so perl5.10-5.9.5-1).
>> Since 5.9.5 is 5.9.5, you should leave it as it is and not
>> give it some whimsical name.  Such is that which causes confusion. It is
>> better to keep standards and names, rather than invent them.
>>
>>> When 5.10.0 is released, the package would be updated to
>>> perl5.10-5.10.0-1 and move to current.
>> When 5.10.0 is released then we have 5.10.0.
>>
>>
>> I believe that keeping to the real names and not inventing others, which
>> would simply serve to confuse people.
>>
>> This has been done before, with other packages and does beget confusion.
>>
>> Respect for a packages, name and version number, should be considered
>> important. Or is there some fundamental reason why, one needs to use a
>> different name other than the original.
> 
> 1) perl 5.8.x and the impending 5.10.x (currently under development
> as 5.9.x, a series of version numbers reserved for development, aka
> experimental, use) are binary incompatible with each other.
> Any user who installs extra modules will be able to use those
> modules only for the version used to build them.  So,
> 
> 2) the perl package can only be used for one of the two.  It's
> reasonable to provide another package with a different name for
> one of the two, and since the existing perl package is perl 5.8.x,
> 5.9.x/5.10.x needs a different package name.  But,
> 
> 3) there is no compelling reason I can thing of for introducing
> separate perl5.9.5 and perl5.10 packages, since the former will
> be obsolete with the release of 5.10.0, in 2 or at most 3 months.
> So it makes sense to me to release the test package for development
> version leading up to 5.10.0 as the perl5.10 package.  If it
> were to be a non-test release, or a release that would endure
> after the advent of 5.10.0, I might agree with you.

All XS modules have to be changed/recompiled anyway because they will
be moved from 5.9 to 5.10. So I see no reason to begin with perl5.10 and 
disabled -DDEBUGGING.

What to do when perl 5.10 is out?
Make perl5.{9,10} obsolete and switch back to perl? I would say so.
Anybody wants to keep old 5.8?
It's nice to have them side-by-side only for development.

So I rather want to have perl (perl-5.8.8-1) and perl5.9 
(perl5.9-5.9.5-1). Both can be installed side-by-side.
perl-5.8.8-1 is curr and perl5.9-5.9.5-1++ is test until perl-5.10-1

perl manpages will be perl5.9_manpages-5.9.5-1
I only have to find a place for the perl5.9_manpages while in test.
/usr/share/man/man{1,3} is for the 5.8 perl_manpages.
I don't like the mingw solution too much. I rather prefer to add another 
MANPATH, like /opt/perl5.9/man for these interim pages. (only for 2-3 
months)

I wrote in README
   - perl5.9 will always be only test, but can/should be used 
side-by-side to perl-5.8.x
     When 5.10 is out, it will replace perl-5.8.8, perl5.9 will be 
obsolete and switched to perl5.11
   - Access to all binaries and scripts are possible by adding the 5.9.5 
suffix.
     e.g. perl5.9.5 perldoc5.9.5 cpan5.9.5 prove5.9.5 ...
   - manpages are in /opt/perl5.9/man until 5.10 is out

-- 
Reini Urban
http://phpwiki.org/  http://murbreak.at/
http://helsinki.at/  http://spacemovie.mur.at/