[gentoo-dev] RFC: Perl CPAN.pm and portage (Bug 551 or "Can't we all get along?")

["Tod M. Neidt" <tod@gentoo.org>]

Hi!

Was looking at Bug 551 ( http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=551 )
this morning.  I believe this particular error was generated because the
user was downloading and install additional perl modules using the
CPAN.pm module that comes with the perl-5.6.1 package, but didn't have
the required perl module dependency libnet installed prior to installing
the telnet module.  Info on the CPAN.pm module can be found at
http://theoryx5.uwinnipeg.ca/CPAN/perl/CPAN.html

Note: I successfully merged the dev-perl/Net-Telnet ebuild using portage
and the dev-perl/libnet ebuild was merged first like it is supposed to
so this really isn't a portage or ebuild issue.

However, this situation does bring up an interesting question regarding
a possible enhancement.

Would it be possible (or even desirable) to hack CPAN.pm and/or portage
so that they play nice together, i.e. a user could find and download
perl modules using CPAN.pm and portage would provide the installation
and package management?


Some Advantages:

1. Useful feature for Gentoo users accustomed to enhancing perl with
modules through the CPAN.pm module.

2. Possibility to effectively eleminate the dev-perl portage category,
while at the same time, (less burden on Gentoo.org servers, and perl
module ebuild maintainers) 

3. providing *all* the perl modules archived at cpan (the archive) to
Gentoo users.

4. Cool hack :)


Some Disadvantages:

1. Extra work maintaining a CPAN.pm-gentoo.diff

2. perl <--> python interface might be difficult?

3. package management accounting if both perl module ebuilds and CPAN.pm
installations are tracked in /var/db/pkg/

As I am not worthy to wash the feet of a perl deity, I am interested in
the thoughts of those who are.

tod