On 8/17/07, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. author (kwalitee, pod, etc) > 2. gui > 3. network > 4. you must have an account/password on $external_service > 5. postgres/mysql/whatever availability/setup/permissions > 6. no modem attached to /dev/ttyS0 > > Thus: "more than one". What I'm saying is that "author" is not enough > (and/or not descriptive enough of a top-level directory of "extra > tests".)
I'm for "author_t" personally. "xt" is meaningless to me. Brainstorming other variations: * optional_t * extra_t (or just extra_tests) * devel_t I really like the idea of highlighting "_t" because it alludes to the convention of tests being in a "t" directory. (And, not that's not intuitive, but it's long established convention.) As for different profiles, there's no reason that one couldn't have: author_t/release author_t/kwalitee author_t/gui author_t/network author_t/runs_for_27_hours etc. Assuming that those are tested with prove anyway, there's no need for any standardization below the top level. And what percent of CPAN distros will really include so many author variations anyway? Let's not let the perfect design be the enemy of the good. There really isn't a need to standardize the top level, either, unless there is a goal of adding support for it to Module::Build and/or ExtUtils::MakeMaker. I think the important thing is establishing a *convention* of keeping tests intended for developers and not end users out of the "t/" directory. David
