Lancaster Consensus

* What: get group consensus and moral authority on various toolchain/QA questions
* When: lunchtime on Fri, Sat, Sunday
* Who: anyone interested

Friday lunch proposed agenda

Currently, it's 5.6.0. Schwern proposes 5.8.X. What should X be? Or should we jump all the way to 5.10.0?

Potential issues, including some things already listed as projects, since those probably require some consensus anyway:

packfiles suck -- how do we fix/replace? (as above) - Final decision on .packfile replacement installation location.
Build.PL spec -- are we done yet? (as above)
Distribution names are not unique -- what do we do?
Do we need a v3 META spec update cycle? If so, what are some starting proposals? (this could include documenting all the known x_ fields being used with META v2)
What in META v2 is vague? E.g. 'provides' must have 'file' but what about dynamically generated modules?
Eliminate the module registration list? (e.g. see this discussion)
Automate PAUSE ID registration? (no human Turing test)
Postinstall target and preinstall target, for installing custom post-install and pre-install package installation helper scripts (which are scripts used by RPM and DPKG to prepare or finish a package installation (for creating users, dirs, fixing permissions, etc.))
Post-install tests! Final decision on where they are to be installed.
Standardize "Pure perl only" build upon configuration? (--no-xs, --pp, --pp_only etc. option, environment variable?)
Using the "ADOPTME" PAUSE ID as comaint to flag abandoned dists
"Nobody is watching the tests" flag
Bus number: what parts of Perl/community infrastructure have a low bus number and what should we do about it?
...

(Please feel free to add more):

version 1 saved on 12/04/13 06:42 by David Golden (‎xdg‎)