Port dependencies on p5-Test-*

[Cheng-Lung Sung]

So step by step,

   Let's take out Test::* from RUN_DEPENDS.

And discuss BUILD_DEPENDS later.
   
    I'll examine my p5-* ports now.
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 05:02:59PM -0800, Yen-Ming Lee wrote:
> 2008/2/25, Dag-Erling SmÈûrgrav <des at des.no>:
> > "Yen-Ming Lee" <leeym at leeym.com> writes:
> > > For Makefile.PL, all dependencies are listed in 'PREREQ_PM' so it's
> >  > hard to tell which ones are really needed and which ones are needed
> >  > only for tests.
> >
> > I assume that in the vast majority of packages that are not themselves
> >  named p5-Test-*, none of the Test::* modules are required.
> >
> >  The sed script I posted may remove too much from Makefile.PL, and
> >  Build.PL, but that doesn't actually matter as long as the port's
> >  BUILD_DEPENDS and RUN_DEPENDS are correct; it only means that
> >  Makefile.PL won't verify that they're there.  The ports tree's
> >  dependency system guarantees that they are, and even if they aren't, the
> >  build will fail.
> >
> 
> Okay, I agree to remove these Test::* from RUN_DEPENDS since they
> should be only used for tests, however I still want to keep them in
> BUILD_DEPENDS so that it will be easier when developers want to 'make
> test' (I know that we don't do it for p5-* perl, but I do).
> 
> So, there are two problems in the current perl ports, and either one
> of them will generate the overkill dependencies:
> 1. depends on the modules which are in perl core list already
> 2. put the dependency-for-test-only (say Test::*) in RUN_DEPENDS
> 
> I wrote a script to catch both problems, and I'll update it daily here:
> http://people.freebsd.org/~leeym/p5-lint.txt
> 
> To simplify the dependency tree for p5- ports, we should start with that list.
> 
> For case 1, someone prefers to use the latest version while someone
> prefer to simply the dependency. I myself prefer the latter. I guess
> it needs further discussion to make a consensus.
> 
> And, note for case 1: If some modules are needed for some features in
> newer version, it should use versioned dependency instead and specify
> the minimum version needed. My script will check with Module::CoreList
> for that specific version.
> 
> For case 2, I guess the consensus is to keep RUN_DEPENDS as simple as
> possible, right?
> 
> Regards,
> -- 
> Yen-Ming Lee <leeym at leeym.com>

-- 
Alan Cheng-Lung Sung - clsung@