Thanks a lot, sounds like good news.
Ch.
==============================================================================
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Doug Bell wrote:
For now, I'm just going to filter them out entirely: They will not appear in
test summaries, release summaries, or failure notifications. I will be holding
on to them, and they can be accessed via the reports API.
In the future, I'd like to populate a "language variant" field for those projects whose
compatibility with the official language is questionable (or not a goal of the project), but for
which some manner of compatibility is possible. This would differ from the "interpreter"
field in that the different interpreters are trying to be compatible with each other, and variants
may not.
I'm getting ready for TPC::NA, so it'll likely be a week or two before I can
address this properly. Until then all I can say is sorry about the useless test
failure notifications: Nobody consulted me on sending in cperl test reports, so
there was no way for me to prepare for it.
Doug Bell
d...@preaction.me
On Jun 7, 2019, at 1:45 PM, E. Choroba <chor...@cpan.org> wrote:
Hi,
I've just noticed one of my distribution failed in 5.28.1. When examining the report, I
found it failed under "strict hashpairs". I had no idea what it was, so I
Googled - and found it's a cperl thing. Reading the report carefully I noticed it was
indeed generated by cperl. See
http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/0de93324-8933-11e9-9997-9db8de51d2a1
I have no problem with cperl smoking CPAN, but I'm not sure it's a good idea to
include its results among normal Perl versions. What do you think?
Cheers,
Ch.
