Should I fork the cpan script?

[briandfoy]

I have several pull requests to the code I wrote and for which people have supplied patches. These are two years old with no response to the original message, or when I pinged each of them a year ago to check if there was anything holding these up. I've emailed Andreas to ask about helping and received a response, but the situation hasn't changed. There has been a CPAN.pm release since then, but only to fix a security issue.

I'd like to apply these patches:

• RT #107353 says that we need to ignore SIGWINCH #160
• CPAN_OPTS ends upon the wrong side of the args #168
• use correct key to hash in downloaded log message #169
• don't include HTTP status 300 when looking for 2xx #170
• squash numeric warning in cpan -O #171
• cpan -g return value #172

My preference is that these changes be applied in this repo and be included in this distribution. I don't have the commit bits to do that.

Additionally, new issues from any submitter have received no response. Looking back at all issues for the past two years, I see no responses that from anyone who can do anything about it. There are plenty of other issues that deserve attention too.

I'm a bit stuck fixing my code that is in this repo and which is included in the standard library. It looks like this repo is basically dead.

[kstarsinic]

Hear, hear!

[sjn]

Is adoption or comaint in scope?

[FaradayLight]

Given the key role of the module in Perl setups and the number of issues in the backlog, I would support any option that would facilitate the merge of patches that will address some of these issues.