On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 11:42:24PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote: > > I want CPAN Testers to do what I can not easily do, which is test my > code on other platforms on other versions of Perl. > > I do NOT want CPAN Testers to do what I could easily do if I wanted, > but do not, which is run tests that I don't care about.
Can I just clarify something. "CPAN Testers" ne "CPANTS". cpan-testers does not run any extra tests that aren't in the distributions test suite. The only additional reporting it does is what happens in the build/make stages. Maybe you consider that last bit an extra test, but it's one that you are testing on your own machine, so we're not doing anything more than you yourself wouldn't do. As for your other points, several are already planned, and I can only apologise for not having enough time to have implemented them yet. It's just as frustrating for cpan-testers that we haven't moved away from SMTP yet, and haven't been able to implement better filters. You have stated several times that you personally have not been asked, however, that isn't completely true. For the past 3 years I have held a CPAN Testers BOF at YAPC::NA, 2 of which have been in Chicago. Those are for authors as well as testers, to discuss ideas and ways to improve CPAN Testers. It has always been an open invitation, and I try to promote it as such. If you chose to not attend, that's fine, but please don't say you have never been invited to discuss improvements. This whole flamewar has started because of what amounts to a personal attack, certainly on my work for the past few years. The original question by I believe Eric, was an honest question and deserved a fair answer, which I think David did. It didn't then deserve a rebuttal that has offended me personally, and others who are trying to improve cpan-testers into what you are asking at the end of your post. I don't have a problem with authors raising issues with the cpan-testers, that we can look at to try and resolve as soon as possible, but I do take exception to being reprimanded for trying to improve cpan-testers. > I want the Ruby guys go "holy shit, I wish we had something like that." Personally I don't care about any other language, I care about Perl. My decision to join and improve cpan-testers was to help users and author, and thus make CPAN a valued resource for quality code, not just the quantity. I fully accept cpan-testers isn't perfect, hence why I hold BOFs at all the YAPCs I attend. We are already addressing some of the points you've raised, and will try and implement them as soon as we can. However, please bear in mind, like you, we are volunteers. Please note I am not saying you're wrong to want any of the things you want. However, you are phrasing it in exactly the way you have said you wouldn't accept from a user of your modules. There are better ways to get what you want rather than starting a flamewar, and I wish I didn't get ignored when I ask for ideas for improvements. Cheers, Barbie. -- Birmingham Perl Mongers <http://birmingham.pm.org> Memoirs Of A Roadie <http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk>
