On Sat, 11 May 2002, Robert wrote:

> I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I'm sure I'll be
> corrected if I'm wrong.  I suspect that if a prereq module does
> not test PASS, that the module will not be tested at all.
> cpansmoke does a temp install of prereq modules, grading them
> as it goes along.

http://testers.cpan.org/ reports that Apache-AuthCookie (required
by Apache-AuthCookieDBI) has been tested on one platform
(linux-2.2.16), and that passed (on Jun 6, 2001). So, if
cpansmoke did test Apache::AuthCookie, apparently the results
weren't reported. I'm not too familiar with the automated
cpansmoke, but if it did test Apache-AuthCookie, I suspect it
wouldn't get to the 'make test' stage, as 'perl Makefile.PL'
requires the path to a mod_perl enabled Apache httpd to be
entered.

> Why do you say there will be a consistency problem?  I don't
> understand.  All required modules are temporarily installed,
> and unless there is a circular dependency...

All I meant is that, if I followed the policy of failing a
package automatically if PREREQ_PM wasn't filled in properly,
then, in the current example (where Apache::AuthCookieDBI
requires Apache::AuthCookie), in testing Apache::AuthCookieDBI:

- if I didn't have Apache::AuthCookie installed, then
Apache::AuthCookieDBI would automatically fail;
- if I happened to have Apache::AuthCookie installed, then
Apache::AuthCookieDBI wouldn't necessarily fail, at least
for reasons of this missing dependency.

So the grade depends on if I happen to have installed, perhaps
for some unrelated purpose, Apache::AuthCookie. That's what I
meant by consistency - the grade would depend on the specific
installed modules present on the system at the time of testing,
and testing at another time when additional modules may have been
installed, or on an identical system with a different set of
non-standard modules, might change the grade.

Another aspect of consistency is across testers, many of whom use
their machines for other purposes.  Even if one did make it a
policy to fail on the absence of a required PREREQ_PM, in cases
where a common but non-standard module (eg, DBI) is required, it
may be hard to recognize a PREREQ_PM missing.

Just to emphasize, though, it's great that the effort's
going into making automated testing mechanisms - issues
like the one we're discussing seem minor compared to the
value of having such an expanded testing base.

best regards,
randy

Reply via email to