On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Josephine
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 22:17:32 +0200
Simon Wesp <cassmodiah(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> nopaste is back...
> you should include this instead of pearl-App-Nopaste..
the big benefit would be that the package would be alive in epel 4 and 5
again.. sounds good to me.
perl-App-Nopaste isn't a good replacement for nopaste as Jason Farell
mentoined in Bug #504108 Comment 10 before
I'm happy to see that the ruby nopaste can be revived in EPEL, but I'm
not so keen to see it resurrected elsewhere (what happens when
goes away? another two month wait for an update?). The
major benefit of the perl implementation is that it is resilient to
these problems - if one site goes down, it automatically tries a
We've worked to alleviate Jason's concerns: reducing the the size and
number of dependencies pulled in by the perl version - there's still a
fair few that are necessary, but they're all tiny (apart from perl
itself, of course, but pretty much everyone has that already). I don't
really see that as much of a problem.