On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 11:32:23AM -0700, David Wheeler wrote: > On Oct 5, 2004, at 11:25 AM, Paul Johnson wrote: > > >I wonder whether we shouldn't try to standardise the target name before > >it's too late to do so. Module::Build uses covertest, I've always used > >cover, and Geoff has just used test-cover. > > Actually, Module::Build uses "testcover".
Ah. I was believing what you wrote before ;-) > >I'm not overly concerned, but I'll admit to preferring something > >starting with cover, because it completes more easily. (Yes, I'm that > >lazy. I even have make aliased to n.) > > I think that Dave called it "testcover" in Module::Build because it > runs the tests first, and then runs cover. Fair enough. > >So, standardise on covertest? Opinions? > > You'll have to convince the Module::Build folks to change...Personally, > don't care one way or the other. Yeah. I was thinking that since Module::Build is the biggest thing already out there we would just go with whatever they had. On Tue, Oct 05, 2004 at 02:36:09PM -0400, Geoffrey Young wrote: > Devel::Cover is your realm, so I'm happy to follow whichever standard you > choose. as david mentions, Module::Build already has a target, but it would > be nice if they could bend to your will as well ;) Too late for that, I think ;-) I'm happy with what they have. OK then, testcover it is. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
