Discussion agenda
Please don't schedule stuff yourself. If you have ideas, add it to the parking lot list at the end. Thank you. – David Golden (xdg)
All discussions will take place around lunchtime so we can talk while we eat and not lose too much valuable coding time. Exact details will be communicated on Thursday morning.
Tentative schedule:
Thursday, April 16
Test::More roadmap
- Independent of any implementation, what rationales are there for changing Test::Builder?
- what are the problems of Test::Builder today?
- what distinct groups of users would benefit from these problems being addressed?
- how would they benefit? (Are there any prerequisites for these benefits?)
- what are the costs to these or other groups of changing Test::Builder
- what are the risks of changing Test::Builder and how could they be mitigated?
- given benefits, costs and risks, should Test::Builder be changed?
- If there is agreement on changing Test::Builder, does exodist's propose *design* achieve these benefits with the expected costs?
- If the *design* could achieve the desired benefit/cost tradeoff, is the specific implementation at hand suitable?
- If not, what specification changes need to happen and who will review and sign off these changes?
CPAN Security
- SSL for CPAN? For BackPAN? (Pinned certs in CPAN clients?)
- Eliminate mirrors and rely on central CDN?
- Central/SSL only for checksum files?
- Add per-dist checksums for BackPAN?
- Fix PAUSE password length/storage?
Friday, April 17
CPAN Governance
- Background, context and terminology
- Should we have a "Toolchain Charter" for toolchain modules?
- Setting and communicating direction: who, how, when?
- Checks and balances: direction changes, backwards compatibility, deprecation, deletion, dependencies, portability, broken releases, etc.
- Planning for possible maintainer absence and hand-off
- Oversight and "code review"? who, how, when?
- Toolchain charter adoption/promotion
- For toolchain modules → Opt-in? Mandatory? (Which modules – not all of PTG?)
- For "linchpin" or "important" modules → How do we approach their authors to consider something similar?
- PAUSE namespace adoption
- What criteria (if any) should PAUSE admins use to evaluate candidates for taking over a module?
- How should this differ by type of module (e.g. toolchain, "linchpin", "important" or other)?
CPAN Culture and Communication
- TBD
Saturday, April 18
PAUSE (non-security related)
- Draft a formal upload or indexing policy? (E.g. must have license to be indexed)
- Draft a formal takedown policy?
- Allow fast deletion?
- Require META file for indexing?
- Write PAUSE2 for -Omaintainable?
META spec
- Do we need a META v3 at all?
- Require 'provides'?
- Fix/clarify 'conflicts' prereq?
- Add 'breaks'?
- Formalize some 'x_' fields?
Toolchain interoperability
- How can compiler-detecters know about '--pp' without needing authors to change their Makefile.PLs?
Deprecating/dropping support
- Drop toolchain support for the single-quote separator for package names?
Sunday, April 19
- no discussions planned
Parking lot (topics to be scheduled)
- (your ideas here)
version 12 saved on 14/04/15 21:40 by David Golden (xdg)
Home | Tags | Recent changes | History
