--- Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > # from Michael G Schwern > # on Monday 12 March 2007 04:49 pm: > > >If all we do is argue about TAP extensions and never actually > produce > > one we will never have to worry about new versions! > > That's a good plan. To implement it, we really need a committee.
Eric was being tongue-in-cheek and as such, I'm pretty sure that he agrees with Schwern and myself on the following: the only relevant current goal is simply: * Produce Test::Harness 3.0. That's it. Nothing else. I don't care about new versions (well, I do, but not right now). I don't care about the snazzy new features we want or even polishing every corner case. All I want to do is to turn TAP::Parser and friends into a useful module that will, as seamlessly as possible, be a drop in replacement for the current infrastructure. Hell, the only reason Andy added the version number was because it was a completely backwards compatible change which breaks *nothing*. ANYTHING ELSE IS PREMATURE AND I WILL HAPPILY VETO IT! That's not to say we can't discuss it or navel-gaze all day long. I actually like those things. However, I want Test::Harness 3.0 to get done. If that works and it's stable, then we can worry about the other stuff. In fact, as much as I hate to say it, even making things parrellellizable (is that a word?) should be off the table until Test::Harness 3.0 is as seamless an upgrade as possible. Any questions? No? Good, I didn't think so. You may now return to your regularly scheduled whinging (I'll even whinge myself, if it makes you feel better). Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book -- http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Perl and CGI -- http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/
