[ic] Shipping Survey

Andrew Baerg andrew.baerg at gmail.com
Wed Oct 16 18:30:33 UTC 2013

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 2:14 AM, Stefan Hornburg (Racke)
<racke at linuxia.de>wrote:

> In general, it would make sense to have a generic shipping ecosystem for
> Perl + Interchange. But I'm sure there are a few things which can be
> discussed
> resp. enhanced in Shipment, e.g.:
> * use a better way to address the services instead of ->ups, ->...

I had actually not intended the Shipment module to be used directly. I have
to confess that this is my first module published to CPAN. I had asked for
help to get it published and this was one of the things that someone else
did for me. There are definitely some areas where I could use some
mentorship from a Perl guru to steer me in the right direction. :)

One of the main goals was to provide a consistent interface to the various
shipping services so that you could do the following regardless of which
service provider you were using:

my $shipment = Shipment::XYZ->new(
    from_address => Shipment::Address->new( ... ),
    to_address => Shipment::Address->new( ... ),
    packages => [ Shipment::Package->new( ... ), ],


> * use Moo instead Moose

I'm sure this would be fairly straightforward to do.

> * allow other authors to write Shipment::XYZ

Again, I think this was a consequence of how the module was published. I
did not intend to publish Shipment, but I am not clear on how to make
Shipment behave the same as say WebService on CPAN. Could you help me out
with this?

As far as contributing to Shipment, anyone can fork it on github and I
would absolutely welcome help in maintaining the distribution!

> We would of course love to see you on the conference next year.

Looking forward to it!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.icdevgroup.org/pipermail/interchange-users/attachments/20131016/f0c28fec/attachment.html>

More information about the interchange-users mailing list