On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 12:42 AM, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I want nothing in my inbox that I have not explicitly requested. > > I want to choose how I get reports, if at all, and at what frequency.
I'm going to take the first steps towards this over the weekend by deprecating author CC's in the code and encouraging top testers to upgrade their tools. That has the disadvantage of stopping FAIL reports for everyone, including those who want them so in the mean time, I or one of the other CPAN Testers plan to work up a centralized notification that either limits a FAIL email to one per dist/arch/perl-version tuple or else puts all reports into a single daily digest. That isn't entirely "nothing in your inbox", but it should be a dramatic reduction while we figure out where and how to let authors set preferences of this sort. I would imagine that in the meantime we will have an exclusions list for authors to skip, but it will have to be manually maintained until we set up a system to automate preference management. > I want aggregation of reports, so that when I send out a module with a > missing dependency in the Makefile.PL, I don't get a dozen failures in a > day. (Related, but not a want of mine, it could aggregate by platform so I > could see if I had patterns of failure in my code). Have you seen http://matrix.cpantesters.org ? That's the answer to the related part of your question. > I want to be able to sign up for some of this, some of that, on some of > those platforms. That will probably be possible once we figure out how to let authors specify preferences of that type. > 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. Well, this, at least, we're doing today. > 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. Fortunately, we're not doing this. (As someone mentioned, CPAN Testers is not CPANTS.) Unless you count "testing for prerequisites" which we're doing only because they're part of the PL/make/test cycle. > I want the Ruby guys go "holy shit, I wish we had something like that." +1 -- David
