On 04/09/2017 09:03 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
On 10 April 2017 at 12:54, James E Keenan <jkee...@pobox.com> wrote:
7. Used a revised version of 'order-battle.pl' to record the order in
which various modules *first* appeared in the 'fails' file and the
total number of times each module was cited. Results are attached as
'order-of-battle-20170409.txt'.
What is the "order of battle"? It's an approximation of the order in
which, as of today, we need to get new CPAN releases out so that
down-river distros are no longer failing due to failures in their
upstream dependencies.
yeah, this is looking much more like the suffering I'm seeing with vendoring.
Though query: I presume the battle list includes not only "things that
are themselves broken", but "things that are broken because their
dependencies can't be satisfied" ?
Exactly. I've created about 10 bug tickets in the last hour which,
rigorously tested, are not perl-5.26.0-ready ... but those distros
depend on 2 distros which, e.g., have failing tests. Module-Runtime is
at the top of the order-of-battle for good reason. Sub-Identify, as you
know, needs additional corrections in tests. And so on. So many of
these distros may turn out to be perfectly fine once their prerequisites
build/configure/test correctly with PERL_USE_UNSAFE_INC = 0.
( Otherwise I can see some entries in that list and I don't know why
they're there, because I've not seen any reports )
