That sounds quite reasonable to me. On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Kenichi Ishigaki <kishig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's a summary of the minicpan test: > > Total number of distributions as of testing: 35806 > > - Has explicit "dynamic_config: 1" in META: 8606 (24.04%) > - runtime prereq fails: 1953 (5.45%) > - build/test prereq fails: 1496 (4.18%) > > - Has explicit "dynamic_config: 0" in META: 14906 (41.63%) > - runtime prereq fails: 3642 (10.17%) > - build/test prereq fails: 4233 (11.82%) > > - No explicit dynamic_config in META: 12294 (34.34%) > - runtime prereq fails: 2611 (7.29%) > - build/test prereq fails: 1551 (4.33%) > > As the number of implicitly dynamic distributions is a bit too big > just to be ignored, I'd change the analyzer to scan distributions > regardless of the dynamic_config and add some diagnostic message to > each distribution page that requires dynamic_config, to show if the > distribution's prerequisites match uses or not (and probably if it's > statically installable or not), and mark the kwalitee fails only for > the statically installable distributions. Does this makes sense? > > 2016-06-07 1:37 GMT+09:00 Kenichi Ishigaki <kishig...@gmail.com>: > > Thanks, David. Fixed in the master (*), though I haven't deployed it > > yet. I'll test it with minicpan first to see how big the impact is. > > > > > https://github.com/cpants/Module-CPANTS-Analyse/commit/c3dea59f184983505458b74369b76dce7793f069 > > > > > > > > 2016-06-07 1:20 GMT+09:00 Karen Etheridge <p...@froods.org>: > >> Yes, BUT -- for the purposes of kwalitee checks it might be reasonable > to > >> make the prereq_matches_use test more harsh if the flag is omitted > entirely. > >> Otherwise, this kwalitee test will not get to scan many distributions at > >> all. > >> > >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:16 AM, David Golden <x...@xdg.me> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi, Kenichi. > >>> > >>> There's a subtle possible bug. A missing "dynamic_config" field must > be > >>> considered true. The field is required for META.json (version 2), but > >>> META.yml (version 1.4) might omit it. > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Kenichi Ishigaki <kishig...@gmail.com > > > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Thanks for the input. Fixed CPANTS analyzer (*) and started > >>>> regenerating database. > >>>> > >>>> * > >>>> > https://github.com/cpants/www-cpants/commit/2cfff74754f202915e506332529f8ec43226c2db > >>>> > >>>> Kenichi > >>>> > >>>> 2016-06-07 0:30 GMT+09:00 David Golden <x...@xdg.me>: > >>>> > Which Kwalitee test? > >>>> > > >>>> > Generally, as author of OSPrereqs and curator of the > CPAN::Meta::Spec, > >>>> > my > >>>> > opinion is that any tool that draws conclusions about prerequisites > in > >>>> > META.yml/json is doing it wrong unless the "dynamic_prereqs" field > in > >>>> > META > >>>> > is *present* and *false*. (Note that OSPrereqs sets it true.) > >>>> > > >>>> > That said, many tools (such as cpandeps) give pretty good results > doing > >>>> > it > >>>> > wrong. But a Kwalitee test about prereqs in META should not flag a > >>>> > distribution that has dynamic dependencies. I would complain to the > >>>> > Kwalitee test author or else just ignore it. > >>>> > > >>>> > David > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:15 AM, Alceu R. de Freitas Jr. > >>>> > <cpan-testers-discuss@perl.org> wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Hello to all, > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I have a distribution on CPAN (Siebel::Srvrmgr) that uses > Dist::Zilla. > >>>> >> Some modules requirements are dependent of the OS where the > >>>> >> distribution is > >>>> >> installed. I'm controlling that with the plug-in OSPrereqs. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> All seems to be working fine except it is generating an issue with > >>>> >> kwalitee test. A test from it is expecting to have all the prereqs > >>>> >> declared > >>>> >> in the META.yml file, but OSPrereqs is not generating them there, > >>>> >> although > >>>> >> the are (conditionally) considered in the Makefile.PL. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> I wonder if this is a bug of OSPrereqs Dist::Zilla plug-in, a > problem > >>>> >> in > >>>> >> the standard or the kwalitee test itself. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> If there is any documentation that you can point me to I would > >>>> >> appreciate. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Thanks, > >>>> >> > >>>> >> Alceu > >>>> >> > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > -- > >>>> > David Golden <x...@xdg.me> Twitter/IRC/Github: @xdg > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> David Golden <x...@xdg.me> Twitter/IRC/Github: @xdg > >> > >> >
