I don't believe that the Debian packagers would have taken SQL::Statement 1.22 if they had known about CPAN bug 50788. At CPAN 50788 was repeatedly suppressed and the maintainer refused to conduct the supplied test on 1.22.<br>
<br>Debian: I think 1.22 should be removed from Debian testing pending a fix. There may be lots of nice extra functionality there, but the basics are broken. A SQL engine where a simple UPDATE fails is not fit for purpose.<br>
<br>Every other distro is in the same unenviable position as the Debian distro compilers. I will continue to report non-distro specific bugs to CPAN.<br><br clear="all">Paul Beardsell<br>Paul@Beardsell.com<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/10/27 Jens Rehsack <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rehsack@googlemail.com">rehsack@googlemail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
2009/10/26 Paul Beardsell <<a href="mailto:paul@beardsell.com">paul@beardsell.com</a>>:<br>
<div class="im">> 2009/10/26 Jonathan Yu <<a href="http://jonathan.i.yu" target="_blank">jonathan.i.yu</a>@<a href="http://gmail.com" target="_blank">gmail.com</a>><br>
>><br>
>> Hi:<br>
>><br>
>> I'm not sure why all this discussion is happening on the Debian list.<br>
>> I've not seen much that has been discussed that is Debian-specific.<br>
>><br>
>> Note that unstable has version 1.22 of this module, which is the most<br>
>> recent version as upstream. Debian users can always install older<br>
>> versions of the package if they so choose (see the apt-get manpage).<br>
>><br>
</div><div class="im">> I agree, not Debian specific, but reporting of bugs in so-called "old"<br>
> versions of libsql-statement-perl [SQL::Statement]] (even though the bugs<br>
> are in in stable here) are strongly discouraged by the package maintainer at<br>
> CPAN.<br>
<br>
</div>Paul has caught the point. As the maintainers of the CPAN module we<br>
are not responsible for sloppy update cycles for what reason ever in any<br>
distributions (Linux and others), so we decline to accept bugs for module<br>
releases which are depreciated from our point of view. On the other hand,<br>
we're happy to work together with the packaging maintainers of any<br>
distribution to help choosing stable versions (in case of S:S I think,<br>
the packager saw the failed tests of 1.17 .. 1.20 and didn't took<br>
deeper). Same could be for 1.24 of Sys::Filesystem (I added new tests<br>
to get feedback via SmokeTest - but this doesn't tell any about whether<br>
the reported errors where in the module since ages).<br>
<br>
Paul now tries to figure out, what would be the very best way to report<br>
such a problem next time and I think he hopes for a statement from<br>
the Debian perl package maintainers.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
/Jens<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br>