> I cannot imagine a new list owner trying to get this right! This
> would REQUIRE a new interface to set these things.
Whoa, I never said the list owner would be exposed to that! That'd be
cruel and inhumane. :) Guess I should have made that clear.
> Also, there are still plenty of people still using Perl 4 out there.
> Despite the intrinsic value of, umm, "progress", a forced Perl 5
> upgrade would be an extra can of worms to throw in at the same time
> as a majordomo upgrade.
Mmmm, IMO, too much of the existing Majordomo code is trying to work
around perl4 bugs or restrictions. I have absolutely no qualms about
Majordomo 2.0 requiring perl5.002. Perl5 is a couple years old now
and is far better than perl4.
--Chan
References:
|
|
