• http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.makemaker/406
• http://beta.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.module-authors/2006/12/msg4955.html
• and, in the words of the maintainer of EU::MM, http://schwern.org/~schwern/talks/MakeMaker_Is_DOOMED/slides/slide001.html

Note that the first link is to a post by M::B's author, and the second basically points to the third, then says "nyah, nyah, I'm only supporting M::B with my modules." Also, as has been stated many times here and elsewhere, these only mention reasons for *authors*, not for *users*. As a user I find M::B a step backwards, and as an author I've never needed its extra features. So if these are the "plenty of good reasons", color me unconvinced.

I will continue to use EU::MM until I do, whether it be deprecated or no. To change merely for the sake of fashion - and with no good reason that really is all it would be - would be foolish.

I've not read the rest of the thread, but from a general pragmatic pov, while I agree with the latter claim, I don't on the former one. Also, "fashion" in general may mean all or nothing. Of course it carries the risk of promoting stuff that has no real value to be. But it may also be a good fashion instead. OTOH sticking with something just because "it does" is not a good way to operate. Indeed we should all be still programming with Perl 4 techniques because they did the job, after all...

Of course if something gets deprecated there may well be a good reason why. One's opinion may differ, and with... ehm... good reasons too. But one cannot assume that in a collectively taken choice all the others will be dumb idiots...