Request for Core: local::lib #16479
I would like to request that local::lib be considered for inclusion in core
1. IMO, Modules should be cored when they provide essential or ubiquitous
2. local::lib is used by CPAN.pm when using the -I option, and should be
I am aware of multiple simple ways to bootstrap local::lib installation,
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:36:03 -0700, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
I don't object to this. The code doesn't seem to have changed recently so it might be at a good point. What I would be interested in is:
1. Hearing from the current maintainer(s).
I definitely think that something with roughly the capabilities of local::lib belongs in core, but I'm not certain if local::lib itself is appropriate.
There are two main ways to use local::lib. One is to set up a local lib for a project. This works reasonably well. This is often easiest to use via
The other is to install libraries in your home directory. This is very convenient, but rather problematic for anyone with more than one perl. By default, libraries are installed using
This default setup is what
There are other horrible things local::lib has to do internally for some cases. Since local::lib is meant to set up the path to load modules, it can't load any modules that could be in that local lib directory. This includes all dual-life modules. So it can't use
I feel like a core implementation of the local::lib concept could improve on these issues. For a comparison, python's PEP-0370 covers the user directory use case. python includes user directories in its search path by default.
On Sat, 23 Apr 2022 at 17:22, Leon Timmermans ***@***.***> wrote: I agree with the above. local::lib is solving two real problems, but with better core support we can do a better job at both of them.
So how do you and Graham think we should proceed? Cheers, Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"