Future of support for older Perl versions in DBI

Question:

Are there any plans to sunset support for older Perl versions such as 5.8.x in 
DBI in the foreseeable future or is the plan to continue to support 5.8.1+ 
indefinitely until something unforeseen thing prevents it?

Is there any information about how many people are actually still using 5.8.x 
for example?

I ask because I plan to introduce new database-related CPAN modules and am 
starting to think about what minimum Perl version I should support.  By default 
the answer would be 5.8.0+ because that doesn't exclude anything that DBI itself 
supports.  But if DBI later say decided to require 5.10.0+ or something else 
newer than 5.8.x then I would likely follow suit.  I don't actually need any 
Perl features newer than what 5.8.0 provides, but I would leverage some for 
cleaner coding if they were available.

Thank you for any insight.

-- Darren Duncan
0
darren
9/20/2020 6:46:57 AM
perl.dbi.dev 1960 articles. 0 followers. Follow

1 Replies
88 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 10

On Sat, Sep 19, 2020 at 11:46:57PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
> Question:
> 
> Are there any plans to sunset support for older Perl versions such as 5.8.x
> in DBI in the foreseeable future or is the plan to continue to support
> 5.8.1+ indefinitely until something unforeseen thing prevents it?

To the extent that there's a plan at all, that's it.

> I ask because I plan to introduce new database-related CPAN modules and am
> starting to think about what minimum Perl version I should support.  By
> default the answer would be 5.8.0+ because that doesn't exclude anything
> that DBI itself supports.  But if DBI later say decided to require 5.10.0+
> or something else newer than 5.8.x then I would likely follow suit.  I don't
> actually need any Perl features newer than what 5.8.0 provides, but I would
> leverage some for cleaner coding if they were available.
> 
> Thank you for any insight.

Support whatever version you feel comfortable supporting.

Tim.
0
Tim
9/20/2020 9:40:31 AM
Reply: