Le mardi 12 septembre 2006 à 11:15, Chris Dolan écrivait:
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Salve J Nilsen wrote:
Any metric that catches bad things, particularly bad technical
things, is going to be just fine.
Metrics that try to push good behavior are fraught with trouble,
because they
Adam Kennedy wrote:
I'm find with adding an additional environment variable though for the
packaging state. But please lets not decide on anything right now,
AUTOMATED_TESTING is already a sub-optimal name, I'd rather make sure
that the EU::MM, M:B and M:I modules all agreed on a single
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
On the other hand, the downside with this is that modules could
well have URIs that take actions in them,
*pulls out HTTP RFC*
*starts beating random bad programmers over the head with it*
`GET` SHOULD BE SAFE AND IDEMPOTENT!
`GET` SHOULD BE SAFE AND
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris
Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Salve J Nilsen wrote:
Any metric that catches bad things, particularly bad technical
things, is going to be just fine.
Metrics that try to push good behavior are fraught with trouble,
David Golden wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
But with that in mind, I still don't see much point in running them at
install-time, so lately I've modified my pod.t test so that it's skip
message is now skipped: Author tests not required for installation
or the like, and the tests now only run when
Adam Kennedy wrote:
Of course some authors don't care about having a community around their
software, and some don't consider their CPAN package as important or
big enough to warrant a community (despite it probably being licensed
with an open source-friendly license). These people are
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Salve J Nilsen wrote:
Any metric that catches bad things, particularly bad technical
things, is going to be just fine.
Metrics that try to push good behavior are fraught with trouble,
because they start pushing people in odd directions.
Do you have an example
Hi!
On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 11:15:50AM -0500, Chris Dolan wrote:
Wow, excellent post!
Some notes:
The next step in the exercise becomes how to implement those
measures. In the current CPANTS simple proxies are used for those
measures. Namely, we assume that if there is a t/*pod.t file
Gabor Szabo wrote:
On 9/13/06, Thomas Klausner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In theory, we can now remove some of the very simple metrics (that
might not make that much sense), i.e. has_test_pod (no_pod_errors is
much better) and has_test_pod_coverage
The main reason why they're still here is
On Sep 12, 2006, at 6:54 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
[...]
That said, I've have come around a little on the subject of author
tests.
The one advantage they do have, is that their inclusion means that
while I may check POD structure, a pod.t ensures that in the event
of someone else taking
On Sep 12, 2006, at 9:44 PM, Adam Kennedy wrote:
That's fine, but in my opinion, a slightly better solution for
author tests is to include them in revision control (i.e. SVN) but
to exclude them from the public distro via MANIFEST.SKIP. That's
what we do for the Perl::Critic
Gabor Szabo wrote:
On 9/7/06, Salve J Nilsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Oh, and if you want to join the fun and help a bit, here's a (probably
incomplete) list of tasks:
- Metrics:
[snip]
Would the metrics for community support channels that were suggested a
while
Adam Kennedy wrote:
Salve J Nilsen wrote:
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Oh, and if you want to join the fun and help a bit, here's a (probably
incomplete) list of tasks:
- Metrics:
[snip]
Would the metrics for community support channels that were suggested a
while ago be welcome? (The discussion
Thomas Klausner wrote:
The one advantage of dedicated examples for me is that I can take that
example file (mostly downloaded from search.cpan.org), run it, modifiy
it, run it etc.
Cutting and pasting from the docs works as well, no network required. And its
going to be the example for the
Of course some authors don't care about having a community around their
software, and some don't consider their CPAN package as important or
big enough to warrant a community (despite it probably being licensed
with an open source-friendly license). These people are entirely free to
continue
Michael Peters wrote:
Adam Kennedy wrote:
It might be an interesting idea to also add a dependencies_exist
metric, that makes sure that all the dependencies that are declared
actually exist in the CPAN. Dunno, could be of dubiously little value,
but I just managed to somehow upload something
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Hi!
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 10:23:39AM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
- has_example
I thought we were generally negative on this one, because it would
encourage people to spuriously add trivial example directories to their
distributions...
Yes, but I've recently
Salve J Nilsen wrote:
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Oh, and if you want to join the fun and help a bit, here's a (probably
incomplete) list of tasks:
- Metrics:
[snip]
Would the metrics for community support channels that were suggested a
while ago be welcome? (The discussion about them sort of
On 9/7/06, Salve J Nilsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Oh, and if you want to join the fun and help a bit, here's a (probably
incomplete) list of tasks:
- Metrics:
[snip]
Would the metrics for community support channels that were suggested a while
ago be welcome? (The
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 09:15:47PM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
One of the linux distro guys pinged me about Test::Object needing the
very latest (CPAN-only) version of Test::Builder, because it means they
can't package it properly for the distros without upgrading the main
Perl package.
On 9/8/06, Adam Kennedy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On another subject that came up today one one of my modules
(specifically the new Test::Object dependency of PPI) it seems like it
could be a bad idea to have explicit dependencies on the latest version
of a dual-life module.
One of the linux
Hi!
On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 04:28:56PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Thanks for the updates, Thomas. And now on with the complaining!
:-)
- has_example
An optional metric that checks if the author included a dir called
'eg|ex|example(s?)' which in turn includes at least on *.pl
Hi!
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 10:23:39AM +1000, Adam Kennedy wrote:
- has_example
I thought we were generally negative on this one, because it would
encourage people to spuriously add trivial example directories to their
distributions...
Yes, but I've recently introduced the concept of
On 9/7/06, Thomas Klausner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Examples go in the installed docs or they are lost.
The docs could state that there are some ready-to-run examples in that
dir in the distribution.
In one module where we had planty of examples I addeded a script that
would creata a
Jonathan Rockway wrote:
I could be wrong here, but I think the check is to make sure that tar
doesn't set +x on Makefile.PL or Build.PL, thus forcing the user to run
the proper version of perl instead of automagically running the perl
that shebang points to. (Example: Makefile.PL says
On Thursday 07 September 2006 00:51, Gabor Szabo wrote:
In one module where we had planty of examples I addeded a script that
would creata a Module::Name::Examples.pm that is a collection of the
example files in pod format. This modules gets installed so the examples
are right at hand.
I
On 9/7/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 September 2006 00:51, Gabor Szabo wrote:
In one module where we had planty of examples I addeded a script that
would creata a Module::Name::Examples.pm that is a collection of the
example files in pod format. This modules gets
On Thursday 07 September 2006 03:28, Gabor Szabo wrote:
On 9/7/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pod::ToDemo, for example?
Sort of but not exactly.
As I can see in the SDL::Tutorial where Pod::ToDemo is in use,
there can be only one example perl .pm file and the real example is not
On 9/7/06, Gabor Szabo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/7/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 07 September 2006 00:51, Gabor Szabo wrote:
In one module where we had planty of examples I addeded a script that
would creata a Module::Name::Examples.pm that is a collection of the
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Oh, and if you want to join the fun and help a bit, here's a (probably
incomplete) list of tasks:
- Metrics:
[snip]
Would the metrics for community support channels that were suggested a while
ago be welcome? (The discussion about them sort of died out :-\)
- Salve
Adam Kennedy wrote:
It might be an interesting idea to also add a dependencies_exist
metric, that makes sure that all the dependencies that are declared
actually exist in the CPAN. Dunno, could be of dubiously little value,
but I just managed to somehow upload something with bad deps that I
* Salve J Nilsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-09-07 14:15]:
Would the metrics for community support channels that were
suggested a while ago be welcome? (The discussion about them
sort of died out :-\)
Only if it’s possible for an author to state that this metric is
meaningless. F.ex., I can’t
Hi!
During YAPC::Europe in Birmingham I did a (rather short and un-hackish)
hackathon. Slides are available here:
http://domm.plix.at/talks/2006_birmingham_cpants/
During YAPC, I added a few new metrics:
- manifest_matches_dist
Check if the stuff listed in MANIFEST matches what's in the dist
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 02:53, Thomas Klausner wrote:
- buildtool_not_executable
Check if the buildtool (Makefile.PL, Build.PL) are not executable
(and thus need to be called with 'perl Build.PL' thereby specifying
which exact version of Perl you want)
I'm not sure of the value
On 9/6/06, chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 02:53, Thomas Klausner wrote:
- buildtool_not_executable
Check if the buildtool (Makefile.PL, Build.PL) are not executable
(and thus need to be called with 'perl Build.PL' thereby specifying
which exact version of
I could be wrong here, but I think the check is to make sure that tar
doesn't set +x on Makefile.PL or Build.PL, thus forcing the user to run
the proper version of perl instead of automagically running the perl
that shebang points to. (Example: Makefile.PL says #!/usr/bin/perl, but
you really
On Wednesday 06 September 2006 10:27, Jonathan Rockway wrote:
I could be wrong here, but I think the check is to make sure that tar
doesn't set +x on Makefile.PL or Build.PL, thus forcing the user to run
the proper version of perl instead of automagically running the perl
that shebang points
Thanks for the updates, Thomas. And now on with the complaining!
Thomas Klausner wrote:
- has_example
An optional metric that checks if the author included a dir called
'eg|ex|example(s?)' which in turn includes at least on *.pl
IMO examples in an example directory are a detriment, not
Jonathan Rockway wrote:
I could be wrong here, but I think the check is to make sure that tar
doesn't set +x on Makefile.PL or Build.PL, thus forcing the user to run
the proper version of perl instead of automagically running the perl
that shebang points to. (Example: Makefile.PL says
Thomas Klausner wrote:
Hi!
During YAPC::Europe in Birmingham I did a (rather short and un-hackish)
hackathon. Slides are available here:
http://domm.plix.at/talks/2006_birmingham_cpants/
During YAPC, I added a few new metrics:
- manifest_matches_dist
Check if the stuff listed in MANIFEST
Anything that would make the quality of the reviews worse (or malicious)
isn't a negative thing.
Or rather, it IS a negative thing. :)
Adam K
41 matches
Mail list logo
