As I said in my previous email on July 7th: backwards-incompatible changes to the backwards-compatibility layer (Test::Harness) are not a good idea. The proper response is to have people impacted by this issue switch to TAP::Harness, as was suggested several years ago when Test::Harness 3.0 was released. For example, the 'prove' utility calls App::Prove which calls TAP::Harness. If others are using Test::Harness directly, perhaps Eric is right and it should be deprecated? However, it's a core module and I don't know the implications of that. Cheers, Ovid -- IT consulting, training, international recruiting http://www.allaroundtheworld.fr/. Buy my book! - http://bit.ly/beginning_perl Live and work overseas - http://www.overseas-exile.com/
>________________________________ > From: Leon Timmermans <faw...@gmail.com> >To: Ovid <curtis_ovid_...@yahoo.com> >Cc: Ricardo Signes <perl...@rjbs.manxome.org>; "perl-qa@perl.org" ><perl-qa@perl.org> >Sent: Tuesday, 17 September 2013, 17:26 >Subject: Re: TAP::Harness and -w > > > >On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Ovid <curtis_ovid_...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >I'm winding up with astonishingly little bandwidth due to launching our >company, so I was hoping to see a strong consensus from the users. I would >also love to see examples of where the change or lack thereof is causing an >issue. I am SWAMPED with so much email that receiving many opinions piecemeal >makes it hard for me to follow along. >> >>Were I not so bandwidth-constrained, this would be less of an issue, but I'd >>like to see a good Wiki page or something with the pro/con arguments laid >>out. If this is too much, I should turn over maintainership to someone with >>more bandwidth to ensure I'm not a blocker. >> > >Just as I expected, "make it a wiki" means it gets warnocked again. > > >Can we please make a decision, or if we must first come to an agreement on how >to make it? > >Leon > > >
