On Sep 5, 2008, at 09:34, Andy Lester wrote:
Well, yeah, I have too. And sometimes I make a tweak to get things
working on 5.005, and other times I tell my users that it runs 5.006
or later by saying so in Build.PL. Seems reasonable to me to specify
such dependencies.
"Seems reasonable to me" is EXACTLY my frustration. That is YOUR
standard that YOU are specifying.
Well, how else do your users know what versions of Perl you support?
How about if I start sending email to everyone, whether they want it
or
not, if their code doesn't run under -T checking? It seems reasonable
to me that it should.
That's different, isn't it? Your code makes no claims about external
dependencies. You can control that. Making code run under -T might be
a decent Kwalitee metric, but it has nothing to do with whether or not
your tests pass. You can control that in your tests by putting -T on
the shebang line of individual test scripts.
those of us interested in quality hope you'll tell your users about a
Perl version dependency, but no one is demanding anything.
And you will spam me if I don't provide that dependency.
Spam is in the eye of the beholder, I guess. David Golden won't send
you any reports anymore, and I completely agree that email reports
should be opt-in.
This is beyond me and my frustration about getting worthless
emails. It
is about the presumption of telling CPAN authors what they can upload.
No one is telling CPAN authors what they can upload.
No, we're not preventing people from uploading anything, but we're
punishing them for not bending to the whims of the CPAN Testers
ideals.
Punishing? Punishing would be removing a module from CPAN. Getting
fail report emails is annoying and should be changed to be opt-in.
Would that solve your problem?
Best,
David
