On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Barbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To be honest I don't think I've even seen a .tbz or .tar.Z uploaded, so
> would rather discourage their use. Otherwise we could get into a painful
> cycle of upgrading everything that needs to (pretty much every major
> part of the testing apps) anytime someone uses some new archive format,
> or other way of representing a traditional archive format.
I used those in CPAN::Reporter::Smoker (and CPAN::Mini::Devel) because
it's what CPAN.pm supports. CPAN.pm has supported bzip2 since 2006.
However, as you say, there are only a handful of distributions on CPAN
that use bzip2, partly because I don't think Andreas is indexing them
until support is added in CPANPLUS.
Here's the result of my minicpan search on the oddballs:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: /srv/minicpan/authors/id
$ find . -iname "*.Z"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: /srv/minicpan/authors/id
$ find . -iname "*.bz"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: /srv/minicpan/authors/id
$ find . -iname "*.tbz"
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: /srv/minicpan/authors/id
$ find . -iname "*bz2"
./A/AR/ARTURAZ/Net-Vypress-Chat-0.72.1.tar.bz2
./T/TM/TMURRAY/Gopher-Server-0.1.1.tar.bz2
./T/TM/TMURRAY/HTML-Template-Dumper-0.1.tar.bz2
I get your point about the painful upgrade cycle, but the control
point is CPAN/CPANPLUS. My view is that tools should follow whatever
they do. Since CPAN supports bz2, CPAN::Reporter::Smoker should
include those files. If CPANPLUS does not, then YACSmoke et al.
should skip them. If they add new archive formats, we should follow
suit.
Arguably, CPAN Testers should include the union of what CPAN &
CPANPLUS support, as we're trying to show what a "real user" would
experience trying to install a module.
The other option is to include only what PAUSE would index, but I'm in
favor of testing more, not less.
-- David
