rpms/perl-Log-Dispatch/devel perl-Log-Dispatch.spec,1.2,1.3

[Chris Grau]

On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 05:47:55AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-09-24 at 01:28 +0100, José Pedro Oliveira wrote:
> > Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2005-09-22 at 13:48 -0400, Jose Pedro Oliveira wrote:
> > > 
> > >>Author: jpo
> > >>
> > >>Update of /cvs/extras/rpms/perl-Log-Dispatch/devel
> > >>In directory cvs-int.fedora.redhat.com:/tmp/cvs-serv21370/devel
> > >>
> > >>Modified Files:
> > >>	perl-Log-Dispatch.spec 
> > >>Log Message:
> > >>- Exclude mod_perl from the requirements list
> > >>  (overkill for most applications using Log::Dispatch).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > VETO
> > > 
> > > IMO, this decision is a fault and should be reverted. You are breaking
> > > package dependencies. 
> > 
> > I disagree with your opinion and I believe my decision is correct.
> >
> > Reasoning:
> > 
> > 1) to create an ApacheLog dispatcher you need to supply an Apache
> >    object (see
> > http://search.cpan.org/dist/Log-Dispatch/lib/Log/Dispatch/ApacheLog.pm)
> >
> > 2) you can only obtain an Apache* object if your app is running
> >    under mod_perl
> 
> ApacheLog.pm does not depend on mod_perl. It depends on
> perl(Apache2::Log), which currently just happens to be provided by
> mod_perl.

And probably always will be.  It's an integral part of mod_perl.  As
José wrote, Log::Dispatch::ApacheLog will always require an
Apache2::RequestRec object and thus mod_perl.

I don't know what percentage of the Log::Dispatch user space uses it in
conjunction with mod_perl, but it's a certainty that those users will
have mod_perl installed anyway.  Thus the dependencies don't need to be
forced by RPM.

> So, if you split out ApacheLog.pm into a separate sub package, the whole
> problem is gone.
> 
> I.e. a new perl-Log-Dispatch-ApacheLog subpackage would
> Require: perl(Apache2::Log)
> which would cause installation to implicitly/indirectly pull-in
> mod_perl.

Since the filtering method appears to be unpopular, this is the solution
I'd prefer to see.  I use Log::Dispatch both with and without mod_perl,
and I'd hate to see it pull in mod_perl (and thus httpd) on those
systems that don't need it.

> > So, your app should be the one requiring mod_perl and not
> > perl-Log-Dispatch.
> > 
> > Also, when installing this perl package using CPAN you are not
> > required to install mod_perl (see Build.PL).
> > 
> > This kind of requirements nightmare can even get worst if we
> > start to talk about Log::Log4perl which uses Log::Dispatch.
> I am not familiar with Log::Log4perl, but I don't see where the problem
> is.
> 
> AFAIS, the only part inside of the current perl-Log-Dispatch package
> which indirectly depends on something inside of mod_perl is
> ApacheLog.pm. 
> 
> I.e. this all is ordinary perl module dependencies.
> 
> > > If you find this dependency to be too annoying, you probably better
> > > should consider to package 
> > > %perl_vendordir/Log/Dispatch/ApacheLog.pm
> > > into a separate subpackage.
> > 
> > This could be a solution if there are packages that need
> > perl-Log-Dispatch to install mod_perl and apache (I never
> > came across one).
> 
> Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20050924/13c872a4/attachment.sig>