Thomas Klausner wrote: > Hi! > > I had some time recently and added some first META.yml checking to > CPANTS (with the help of Gabor Szabo): > > metayml_is_parsable > metayml_has_license > metayml_conforms_spec > > metayml_has_license now indictes whether there's a computer readable > license in META.yml, while (the also new metric) > has_humanreadable_license does some where basic guessing if there's a > human-readable license (LICENSE file or pod-section). > > metayml_conforms_spec currently very much busts the CPANTS game. I'm > checking if the files comply to META.yml spec 1.2. Most don't, because > they seem to use 1.0 > Should I switch to 1.0-checking?
Just for giggles, what's the code behind that? Is it different than the current CPAN method: metayml_has_required_fields Is there a good way to check for 1.2 in a test, other than a "these fields are required and YAML parses it" type of strategy? -=Chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
