Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > It's possible I'm being overly picky here, but I have to admit that I'd > prefer it if the test script and the changes to existing files as a > result of issues found by the script were two commits rather than being > bundled in to one.
Do you have any special reason? I've nothing against doing it the way you say, but by including both changes in the same commit it makes a clear point as to why those changes were made and based on what. > > Similarly, whilst having the code examples used in the POD be valid is a > good thing, some of the changes don't quite feel right; for instance: > > - check_maintainer ($maintainer, $field); > + check_maintainer my ($maintainer, $field); > > Again, I'm possibly being overly picky. Ok, I'll stop the hackish and only do rightish :). Russ Allbery wrote: > I always had trouble with the POD test stuff that checks the syntax of > the embedded code because it requires things like declaration of > variables, but a real code excerpt from a running program isn't going to > declare variables directly above the call. > IMO the cost of declaring the variables was lower than not testing the code at all. But it would be nice if 'use strict' wasn't used. Cheers, -- Raphael Geissert - Debian Maintainer www.debian.org - get.debian.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
