On Sat, Mar 19, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Chad Granum <exodi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > RJBS and I have spoken, and feel it is time to set a release date for > Test2/Test-Builder. We have agreed that doing it at the QAH in Rugby is a > good time. The plan is to release Test2 and the new Test::Builder as stable > either at the end of the first day, or the start of the second day (so the > 21st or 22nd of april). This gives a full day for people to grab me in > person to talk about it, and address any issues. It also gives 2 full days > after the release where my attention can be fully devoted if any issues are > discovered post-release. > > I expect little if any changes to occur in the code between now and then. > Possibly some small bug fixes, documentation updates, etc. nothing big. I > will continue to listen to any feedback that is provided, and take any > necessary action. In the meantime RJBS is going to be pinging stakeholders > from the punch-list ( > https://github.com/Test-More/test-more/wiki/Test-Builder-v1.3-Punchlist) > to make sure all requirements have been met. > > What exactly is going stable? > > * Test2 (experimental notices will be removed) > > * Test::Builder that uses Test2 under the hood (as seen here: > https://metacpan.org/release/EXODIST/Test-Simple-1.302013_014) > > * Test2-Suite (experimental notices will be removed) > > * Final Test2/Test-Simple patch for perl blead (Test-Suite is not going > into blead) > > I look forward to seeing you all in Rugby! > I think 1 is a good idea, but I have some reservations about the 2 (and thus 4). Is it really advantageous to switch over everyone to Test2 today? I think Test2 has major benefits for some people (it makes new things possible), but it also has major disadvantages for others (it breaks stuff); both have unknown upper bounds. And to be honest, for the vast majority I don't feel like it will matter; they don't need (much) more than Test::More. Wouldn't it make more sense to make this opt-in? Leon
