Is Perl a good option for writing (possibly and partially) platform independent desktop applications? I know there are interesting widget libraries like GTK2 Perl and wxWidgets but I'm not familiar with development on Windows.
Is it possible to write a good application with Perl and those tools, maybe embedding everything needed to avoid asking the user to install external (and probably non conventional for many) libraries? Are there examples of this kind of apps around?
Sort of. You can certainly write Perl scripts that provide a Tk GUI that will work on any platform, and you can even package the libraries they need to work with PAR to put together an application that will run anywhere with an appropriate version of perl installed without requiring the end use to install a bunch of stuff from CPAN to get it to work.
However, an application that will run anywhere without requiring an existing perl installation (and it's probably not safe to assume the average Windows user will have perl) isn't really viable. One solution would be to distribute an "everywhere but Windows" version that simply uses PAR to include the necessary libraries, and a PAR::Packer-built version for Windows, which would be a fully-functional .exe including the perl interpreter and the libraries.
EDIT: following daotoad's response, it does appear that ActiveState's PerlApp can build cross-platform binaries for for Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, Solaris, and AIX; I haven't tried this but if it works as advertised it would seem to meet your requirements.
My employer uses ActiveState's PerlApp to produce executable versions of our apps with great success.
We tested PAR and PerlApp before selecting our packaging method. At that time, PerlApp had faster load times. Several versions of each tool have come and gone since then, so I would recommend testing with each before selecting a tool.
Executable packaging has been very effective for us.
There are a few portability issues issues with Perl, but if you pay attention to perlport, it's easy to avoid most issues. Our biggest problems are always with Win32. From time to time, some simple thing will require stupid, bizarre work-arounds or digging into Win32 API for a platform specific hack.
We have used both Wx and Tk guis.
Frozen Bubble is a well known and widely available app you can look at.
Check out PAR (available via CPAN) with respect to your bundling requirement.
Consider having a look at Padre for an example of a complex application written in perl using Wx.
So yes. All of your requirements are achievable, including portability.
I am working on the module XUL::Gui on CPAN, which uses Firefox to display cross platform gui apps from Perl. It is under development, but stable, and may be complete enough for your needs. You can build your gui in HTML and/or XUL (the Mozilla gui language that Firefox itself is written in), and then style everything with CSS. Let me know if you have any feature requests.
Related
For example, I want to compress log files a script generates. I'm using version 5.8.8 so there isn't anything built into the core to do it. The script is cross-platform, Linux, Solaris, AIX, HPUX, and Windows.
Right now I'm thinking of using IO::Compress::Gzip. Are there any known bugs with that module? Will it work across all platforms?
To generalize a little more, how can I find out if a certain module has any known bugs, and what platforms that module will run on?
CPAN offers an array of tools you can use to determine the usefulness of a module before installing it. Unfortunately, IO::Compress::Gzip is a suboptimal example of how this can go.
When you visit the metacpan page of a module, there is a list of tools in the left column. The interesting points are
Test Results: This takes you to a page where the results of the test suite on different OSes and different perl versions are shown. Unfortunately, this service doesn't respond to my requests at the time of writing.
Bugs: This is a link to the bugtracker for this module. You can browse the list of open bugs to find possible dealbrakers. And if you find an issue, you can report it here.
Reviews: Some modules have short reviews and ratings by the Perl community. The module you mentioned doesn't have any ratings yet, so as an example, here are the ratings for List::MoreUtils.
Dependencies are listed on the right column. If you click the “dependencies” link, you can get a summary of test results for the required non-core modules for a given perl version. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be any results available currently.
Many modules also have a “bugs and limitations” section in the documentation.
Note: according to the corelist program, IO::Compress::Gzip is a core module since perl5, v9.4. This doesn't mean much: Core modules are in Core because they are needed to install other modules (or because they have historical significance … CGI, *cough*). However, this is an indication that it is reasonably stable and thoroughly cross-platform.
I'd like to write some interactive GUIs in Perl. I've used TclTk but it looks dated. I've written QT code for C++, but the PerlTk module hasn't had a release in several years. Googling around I see other possible options.
What are good packages for this, including basic windowing, menus, drawing canvas, scrollbars, and so on.
Gtk2 has glade2 which can write out an XML file usable by Gtk2::GladeXML. Here is an example of how to bundle the XML with the app in the same file.
I misread the question at first. I thought you wanted a GUI editor for making GUIs (which is what glade2 is). You can also create GUIs using Gtk2 without glade2:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Gtk2;
Gtk2->init;
my $window = Gtk2::Window->new;
my $vbox = Gtk2::VBox->new;
my $label = Gtk2::Label->new("Hello World");
my $button = Gtk2::Button->new("Press me");
$window->add($vbox);
$vbox->add($label);
$vbox->add($button);
$window->set_default_size(200, 200);
$window->signal_connect(
destroy => sub {
Gtk2->main_quit;
}
);
my $i = 0;
$button->signal_connect(
clicked => sub {
$label->set_text("button pressed " . ++$i . " times");
}
);
$window->show_all;
Gtk2->main;
Try wxPerl!
From the web site:
wxPerl is an extension module allowing
the creation of GUI (Graphical User
Interface) from Perl; it is built as a
wrapper for the awesome wxWidgets C++
GUI toolkit.
Echoing Chas Owens, glade is quite usable with Gtk2 in Perl. In addition, Gtk2 also supports GtkBuilder files (which you can create the latest glade too).
The main problem with wxPerl (and wxWidgets itself) is that it doesn't let you install file event watchers into its main loop (it only has GUI, Socket and Timer events), unlike Tk and Gtk.
The Qt, Tk and Gtk2 event loops can be used in Perl with AnyEvent, and Gtk2 can be hooked into applications running the Event or Ev mainloop with Glib::Event and Glib::EV modules.
A GUI builder for WxPerl would be wxGlade or wxFormBuilder, both open-source.
I would probably use Gtk2, but Tk is definitely not dead. The lack of releases is due to the bugs being ironed out over the years. A lot of people still use it, and it generally works fine. (Tk's event loop is somewhat silly, but that is a detail that probably shouldn't concern you.) The only disadvantage is that your GUI looks like it is from 1996, but who cares?
(The gitk tool included with git showed that Tk GUIs look fine as long as they're useful.)
Recently I was made aware of another GUI toolkit for Perl called Prima. Its claim to fame is that it was written in C especially for Perl, not a port from TCL or bindings to something else. Assuming you have some rather standard libraries on your system, it will install directly from CPAN and its cross-platform!
David Mertens has been writing a new plotting library for PDL using it, and a REPL too!
Regarding quality of widgets, all three gtk2, wx and qt4 are equally good -- gtk2 is fastest, qt4 has best resolution, whereas wx is somewhere between the two in terms of both the parameters.
But tk is behind all the three both in terms of speed and resolution, but remains firstly because it is the original widget for all unix based interpreted languages, and secondly because it is native-widget of freebsd.
As on today in case of perl, documentation of perl-gtk2 is slightly more developed than both perl-qt4 which is in turn is more developed than wxperl. In fact, if you browse the web, you will find that tutorials for perl-gtk2 is more extensively available than even pygtk (which is also very well established) and ruby-gtk2. In case of python, wxpython documentation leads over PyQt and pygtk, whereas in case of ruby, ruby-qt4 leads over ruby-gtk2 and wxruby. However, others are developing very fast (e.g. ruby-gtk2) and after some time all nine will be equal in all aspects.
The perl-qt4 specific problem is: In case of non-kde desktops, perl-qt4 may not run. I tried running all in ubuntu and sabayon and found that perl-gtk2 and even wxperl (and wxruby also) runs fine whereas I'm not able to run even a single perl-qt4 programs in gnome-desktop where I have installed complete qt4 support without kde.
perl-qt4 asks for installation of not just qt4-libraries, but also kde-desktop libraries. This problem is uniquely perl-qt4-specific, does not exist in case of PyQt and rubyqt4 since they both run fine with qt4 runtime under gnome.
Hence, in this way eight (plus three tk) out of nine options did well (I havent tested PySide yet).
In case of perl-tk, widget is well developed and established and unlike tkinter, pmw and rubytk, its documentation is the best among all of these mentioned above.
But maybe after some time all the documentations become developed and any would become equally good.
After taking a balance between speed, clarity and cross-platform into consideration choose either perl-gtk2, or perl-qt4 or wxperl.
perl-tk, perl-gtk2 and perl-qt4 syntaxes nicely go well with perl programming language syntax, whereas wxperl syntax look more like proper c++ blended into perl which is different from the respective language syntax (just like in case of wxpython and wxruby).
But if you are already keeping in mind that wx code is uniquely different then you can straightaway begin with wxperl.
Otherwise, best way out is: begin with perl-tk, then switch over to perl-gtk2 then perl-qt4 or wxperl alike but make sure that you learn all four instead of only one (the same sequence should also apply to python and ruby too despite the fact that documentation support is reverse, but in case of perl even for this aspect it is same).
I don't have a real answer for you, but often you have to consider your deployment targets. Some of the GUI libraries are very nice, but only if you can get them to work on your operating system. I don't necessarily think that all frameworks need to be cross-platform compatible, a very laudable goal to work toward in a perfect world, as long as the one you choose doesn't lock out a significant portion of your users because the foundation GUIs libraries are hard to install or support on a particular platform.
I just want to let everyone know PerlQt is great and this site has a lot of tutorials on how to use it and lots of examples to download.
PerlQt Wiki tutorial
PerlQt is a very fast and easy way to create great looking GUI programs using the Qt drag and drop form designer and Perl. PerlQt is powerful enough for advanced developers and easy for beginners as well.
The solution I'm going with is Gtk-Perl. At first I had difficulty installing it, but in the end I found Camelbox Perl+Gtk2 in one package.
I have used Tk, but in the last few days I have been playing around with Continuity (CPAN entry), a stateful (persistent state per user) web application/server, and it could easily be a way to add "GUI" features into an application, while making it multi-user and portable at the same time.
Edit: At the time I wrote this, I was most interested in the fact that Continuity had its own built-in webserver. This is now true of other webframeworks for Perl as well. I have been using Mojolicious though I hear good things about Dancer too.
I have a bunch of related Perl scripts that I would like to put together in one convenient place. So I was thinking of building a GUI and incorporating the scripts. I'm using Strawberry Perl on Windows XP and have just installed Tk from cpan about fifteen minutes ago. Before I go for it, I want some sound advice either for or against it.
My other option is to translate the Perl scripts into VB and use Visual Studio 2008, but that might be too much hassle for an outcome that might end up all the same had I just stuck with Perl & Tk.
I haven't looked yet, but maybe there is a module for Visual Studio that would allow me to invoke Perl scripts?
The main requirements are:
It must be able to communicate with MySQL
It must be able to fetch & parse XML files from the internet
It must be transportable, scalable, and sustainable
What direction would you take?
I've built Perl/Tk apps on Windows before and found it just fine, including using PAR to package everything up for distribution to others. It was nice being able to do most of my development on a proper Linux system and have things just magically work on Windows :) The only gotcha I encountered is that Tk doesn't play well with ithreads.
I personally would recommend wxPerl over Tk. It has native looking widgets, at least in my view leads to cleaner code and you can use wxGlade as a GUI designer.
If you haven't programmed with Perl/Tk I would think that Tkx (developed by Activestate) would be a better option. Tkx is a thin layer over Tcl/Tk, which gives it access to the new themed widgets in Tcl/Tk so your application would look better.
Perl/Tk has a lot more documentation around, but the module itself does not seem to be developed anymore. The documentation for Tkx is very sparse but by following the Tkx tutorial files on CPAN, it should be easy to get started.
WxWidgets (available for Perl via wxPerl) is an excellent graphical toolkit, but wxPerl only implements a subset of the available widgets.
PAR is convenient but if you go with Perl/Tk, the result will not run natively on OS X. (Users will need to run X11 first, which is problematic, especially with more recent version of OS X). If you go with Tkx, you can get native application on Mac OSX. Also, ActiveStates's PDK gives you a simple way to package everything to deploy to Windows, Linux, and OS X.
For reference, see the the software (AntConc and AntWordProfiler) at the following site http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp/software.html, where AntConc was developed using Perl/Tk and AntWordProfiler was developed using Tkx.
The Process class allows to start new processes from a C# (WPF/Winforms) frontend.
I guess that way you can keep your Perl scripts and use the nice Visual Studio GUI builder.
I'd like to write some interactive GUIs in Perl. I've used TclTk but it looks dated. I've written QT code for C++, but the PerlTk module hasn't had a release in several years. Googling around I see other possible options.
What are good packages for this, including basic windowing, menus, drawing canvas, scrollbars, and so on.
Gtk2 has glade2 which can write out an XML file usable by Gtk2::GladeXML. Here is an example of how to bundle the XML with the app in the same file.
I misread the question at first. I thought you wanted a GUI editor for making GUIs (which is what glade2 is). You can also create GUIs using Gtk2 without glade2:
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
use Gtk2;
Gtk2->init;
my $window = Gtk2::Window->new;
my $vbox = Gtk2::VBox->new;
my $label = Gtk2::Label->new("Hello World");
my $button = Gtk2::Button->new("Press me");
$window->add($vbox);
$vbox->add($label);
$vbox->add($button);
$window->set_default_size(200, 200);
$window->signal_connect(
destroy => sub {
Gtk2->main_quit;
}
);
my $i = 0;
$button->signal_connect(
clicked => sub {
$label->set_text("button pressed " . ++$i . " times");
}
);
$window->show_all;
Gtk2->main;
Try wxPerl!
From the web site:
wxPerl is an extension module allowing
the creation of GUI (Graphical User
Interface) from Perl; it is built as a
wrapper for the awesome wxWidgets C++
GUI toolkit.
Echoing Chas Owens, glade is quite usable with Gtk2 in Perl. In addition, Gtk2 also supports GtkBuilder files (which you can create the latest glade too).
The main problem with wxPerl (and wxWidgets itself) is that it doesn't let you install file event watchers into its main loop (it only has GUI, Socket and Timer events), unlike Tk and Gtk.
The Qt, Tk and Gtk2 event loops can be used in Perl with AnyEvent, and Gtk2 can be hooked into applications running the Event or Ev mainloop with Glib::Event and Glib::EV modules.
A GUI builder for WxPerl would be wxGlade or wxFormBuilder, both open-source.
I would probably use Gtk2, but Tk is definitely not dead. The lack of releases is due to the bugs being ironed out over the years. A lot of people still use it, and it generally works fine. (Tk's event loop is somewhat silly, but that is a detail that probably shouldn't concern you.) The only disadvantage is that your GUI looks like it is from 1996, but who cares?
(The gitk tool included with git showed that Tk GUIs look fine as long as they're useful.)
Recently I was made aware of another GUI toolkit for Perl called Prima. Its claim to fame is that it was written in C especially for Perl, not a port from TCL or bindings to something else. Assuming you have some rather standard libraries on your system, it will install directly from CPAN and its cross-platform!
David Mertens has been writing a new plotting library for PDL using it, and a REPL too!
Regarding quality of widgets, all three gtk2, wx and qt4 are equally good -- gtk2 is fastest, qt4 has best resolution, whereas wx is somewhere between the two in terms of both the parameters.
But tk is behind all the three both in terms of speed and resolution, but remains firstly because it is the original widget for all unix based interpreted languages, and secondly because it is native-widget of freebsd.
As on today in case of perl, documentation of perl-gtk2 is slightly more developed than both perl-qt4 which is in turn is more developed than wxperl. In fact, if you browse the web, you will find that tutorials for perl-gtk2 is more extensively available than even pygtk (which is also very well established) and ruby-gtk2. In case of python, wxpython documentation leads over PyQt and pygtk, whereas in case of ruby, ruby-qt4 leads over ruby-gtk2 and wxruby. However, others are developing very fast (e.g. ruby-gtk2) and after some time all nine will be equal in all aspects.
The perl-qt4 specific problem is: In case of non-kde desktops, perl-qt4 may not run. I tried running all in ubuntu and sabayon and found that perl-gtk2 and even wxperl (and wxruby also) runs fine whereas I'm not able to run even a single perl-qt4 programs in gnome-desktop where I have installed complete qt4 support without kde.
perl-qt4 asks for installation of not just qt4-libraries, but also kde-desktop libraries. This problem is uniquely perl-qt4-specific, does not exist in case of PyQt and rubyqt4 since they both run fine with qt4 runtime under gnome.
Hence, in this way eight (plus three tk) out of nine options did well (I havent tested PySide yet).
In case of perl-tk, widget is well developed and established and unlike tkinter, pmw and rubytk, its documentation is the best among all of these mentioned above.
But maybe after some time all the documentations become developed and any would become equally good.
After taking a balance between speed, clarity and cross-platform into consideration choose either perl-gtk2, or perl-qt4 or wxperl.
perl-tk, perl-gtk2 and perl-qt4 syntaxes nicely go well with perl programming language syntax, whereas wxperl syntax look more like proper c++ blended into perl which is different from the respective language syntax (just like in case of wxpython and wxruby).
But if you are already keeping in mind that wx code is uniquely different then you can straightaway begin with wxperl.
Otherwise, best way out is: begin with perl-tk, then switch over to perl-gtk2 then perl-qt4 or wxperl alike but make sure that you learn all four instead of only one (the same sequence should also apply to python and ruby too despite the fact that documentation support is reverse, but in case of perl even for this aspect it is same).
I don't have a real answer for you, but often you have to consider your deployment targets. Some of the GUI libraries are very nice, but only if you can get them to work on your operating system. I don't necessarily think that all frameworks need to be cross-platform compatible, a very laudable goal to work toward in a perfect world, as long as the one you choose doesn't lock out a significant portion of your users because the foundation GUIs libraries are hard to install or support on a particular platform.
I just want to let everyone know PerlQt is great and this site has a lot of tutorials on how to use it and lots of examples to download.
PerlQt Wiki tutorial
PerlQt is a very fast and easy way to create great looking GUI programs using the Qt drag and drop form designer and Perl. PerlQt is powerful enough for advanced developers and easy for beginners as well.
The solution I'm going with is Gtk-Perl. At first I had difficulty installing it, but in the end I found Camelbox Perl+Gtk2 in one package.
I have used Tk, but in the last few days I have been playing around with Continuity (CPAN entry), a stateful (persistent state per user) web application/server, and it could easily be a way to add "GUI" features into an application, while making it multi-user and portable at the same time.
Edit: At the time I wrote this, I was most interested in the fact that Continuity had its own built-in webserver. This is now true of other webframeworks for Perl as well. I have been using Mojolicious though I hear good things about Dancer too.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
What's the best framework for writing modules -- ExtUtils::MakeMaker (h2xs) or Module::Build?
NOTE This advice is out of date. Module::Build has been removed from the Perl core but lives on as a CPAN module. The pros and cons still stand, and my opinions about MakeMaker still stand.
As the former maintainer of ExtUtils::MakeMaker, I like to recommend Module::Build because MakeMaker is a horror show. Module::Build is so much better put together. But those aren't your concerns and I'll present my "least hassle for you" answer.
Executive Summary:
Because Module::Build support is not 100% in place through all of Perl, start with MakeMaker. If you want to do any customization at all, switch to Module::Build. Since their basic layout, options and interface are almost identical this will be painless. As seductive as it looks, avoid Module::Install.
Fortunately, Module::Build can emulate MakeMaker which helps some, but doesn't help if you're going to do any customization. See Module::Build::Compat.
For CPAN releases using Module::Build is fine. There's enough Module::Build stuff on CPAN now that everyone's dealt with getting it bootstrapped already.
Finally, the new configure_requires option lets CPAN shells know to install Module::Build before they can start building the module. Unfortunately only the latest CPAN shells know about configure_requires.
Oh, whatever you do don't use h2xs (unless you're writing XS code... and even then think about it).
MakeMaker Pros:
Comes with Perl and used by the Perl core (therefore it is actively
maintained and will remain so forever)
Everything knows what to do with a Makefile.PL.
Most module authoring documentation will cover MakeMaker.
Uses make (those who know make can debug and patch the build
process)
MakeMaker Cons:
Requires make (think Windows)
Difficult to customize
Even harder to customize and make cross platform
Difficult to debug when something goes wrong (unless you understand make)
Module::Build Pros:
Easier to customize/subclass
Pure Perl
Easier to debug (it's Perl)
Can emulate MakeMaker in several ways
The CPAN shell will install Module::Build for you
Module::Build Cons:
The Module::Build maintainers (and indeed all of the Perl Toolchain Gang) hate it
Older versions of CPAN clients (including CPANPLUS) don't know anything about Module::Build.
Module::Install Pros:
Slick interface
Bundles itself, you have a known version
Everything knows how to deal with a Makefile.PL
Module::Install Cons:
Requires make
Always uses bundled version, vulnerable to external breakage
Difficult to customize outside its interface
Mucks with the guts of MakeMaker so a new MakeMaker release will eventually break it.
Does not know how to generate a META file using the v2 meta-spec
(increasingly a problem with newer tools)
There are two questions here.
First, never use h2xs. It's old outdated nastiness, though I suppose if you're actually trying to turn a header file into XS code, it might be useful (never done that myself).
2011 update: I strongly recommend taking a look at Dist::Zilla, especially if you think you'll be maintaining more than one module.
For creating a new module, use Module::Starter. It works great, and has some nice plugins for customizing the output.
Second, you're asking what build system you should use. The three contenders are ExtUtils::MakeMaker (EUMM), Module::Build (MB), and Module::Install (MI).
EUMM is a horrid nasty piece of work, but it works, and if you're not customizing your build process at all, works just fine.
MB is the new kid, and it has its detractors. It's big plus is that if you want to heavily customize your install and build process, it's quite possible to do this sanely (and in a cross-platform manner) using MB. It's really not possible using EUMM.
Finally, MI is basically a declarative wrapper on top of EUMM. It also packages itself along with your distro, in an attempt to work around problems with users trying to install modules with old toolchain modules. The downside of the "package self" trick is that if there's a bug in MI itself, you have to re-release all your modules just to fix it.
As far as customization goes, there are some plugins for MI, but if you want to go beyond them you'll be back at the problem of dealing with Makefiles and build tools across a dozen+ platforms, so it really isn't going to help you too much in that realm.
I just uploaded Distribution::Cooker to CPAN. It's what I use to make new distributions. The nice thing about it is that your distributions can be whatever you like: you're just cooking some templates. I don't care if anyone uses it. For me it's simple, low tech, and doesn't cause extra problems.
You might start with something like Module::Starter to make your starter templates then add your own boilerplate and favorite way of doing things. You choose not only whatever you want in each file, but which files show up in the distro. As you figure out how you like to do things, you simply update your own templates.
As for Makemaker and Module::Build, the future is Module::Build. It's only us old guys using Makemaker anymore. :) There are ways to use both (or pretend to use both) at the same time. Look at the Module::Build, Module::Build::Compat, and Module::Install docs. Module::Build was kicked out of Perl's Standard Library and it's future is uncertain. It's back to Makemaker as a build system.
Although this is a bit of a cop-out answer, try using each just to get a little experience with each.
You also might want to look at Dist-Zilla which is a new author-only tool to create distributions. Because it just helps build the distribution, it doesn't ship with your code or do any installation, it can do a lot of powerful stuff.
The only trouble with compatibility regarding Module::Build is when a user tries to install modules without updating their CPAN client (CPAN.pm or CPANPLUS.pm) If they are installing your module from the CPAN, they can just as easily upgrade their client from the same mirror.
If you don't want to do anything complicated in your build process, sure: use EUMM. But if you have a build problem on a different target platform, you might end up in the Makefile, which is different on every variation of make.
Module::Build gives you lots of features (anything you can think of if you extend it) and is all perl so you never end up debugging a makefile. Module::Install gives you features, but you have to bundle it and everything ends up running through 'make' in the end.
I also recommend Module::Build and Module::Starter (with the TT2 plugin).
Module::Build is better by any means, but it is less widely supported than ExtUtils::MakeMaker (more specifically, older versions of Perl don't support it out of the box). It depends on your needs.
Personally, I recommend Module::Install, as do a lot of folks I know - the likes of the Catalyst and Moose folks also use it.
Here's a little clarification of the direction I hoped the responses would take:
pros/cons of various of frameworks
compatibility/install base of frameworks
suitability for internal (local) vs. external (CPAN) releases
not bare "use X" answers
Dave's answer has some good pro/con info. Leon's answer alludes to compatibility but isn't explicit. As brian d foy mentioned, only the old hats use EUMM, but I'm not convinced that MB is a good framework for things destined for CPAN due to it not being part of the core until 5.9.
There are pros and cons to both. These days I use and recommend Module::Build and Module::Starter.
EU::MM still seems to be the most widely supported and popular one, but Module::Build is catching up. Also, check out Module::Starter for a module that will help you get started.