Joshua Ferraro a écrit :
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:18 AM, MJ Ray <mjr@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
Warning: Reply-To set to koha-devel.
"Andrew Moore" <andrew.moore@liblime.com> wrote:
I guess it should be optional. Good point. If it's an optional dependency, how should I indicate that? Should I leave it out of Makefile.PL altogether?
I know no good way to indicate optional modules in Makefile.PL. Three choices that I think are better than total omission:-
1. put it in as a comment and POD string;
2. put it in as something like %CURRENT_PM like spamassassin does http://spamassassin.apache.org/full/3.0.x/dist/Makefile.PL
3. switch on META.yml generation and add a recommends line http://module-build.sourceforge.net/META-spec.html
Which do people prefer? I'd lean towards doing (1 or 2) and 3.
I prefer that all potential dependencies be clearly stated in the Makefile.PL, whether for optional features or not ... too many people installing Koha will perceive an after-the-fact error message, a bug in Koha.
Cheers,
I detinitely agree with your point of view. But what could also be a good behaviour would be to disable some links or some features if some perl module was not installed. But for image processing module, could be a pain for the developer that is willing to provide a new feature. Would allow more reliable installing and setting though. For instance, I have been said that SMS::Send even if not used or not desired would be required just becaus it was loaded in some core modules. If not, then error 500 would come out. I havenot investigated. But maybe we should be aware of the fact that adding a new dependency, should be done quite conciously and cautiously. And if dependency is not require, try and test on a fresh build bot so that it is proven that it is not generating errors not to install the perl module added. Hoping to be clear, midnight here. -- Henri-Damien LAURENT _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list Koha-devel@lists.koha.org http://lists.koha.org/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel