Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On 9/25/07, Chris Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, one option might be something like: http://www.cpanforum.com/tags/name/helpwanted Gabor, would it be easy to add an Atom/RSS feed for a particular tag? Please no! Let's not spread module metadata around any more than we have to. Extend META.yml to include the same kind of information that used to be managed via the modules list. If someone wants to write a website to index and syndicate *that*, fine, but don't make authors go to multiple places to create and manage their metadata. David
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 08:54:12AM +0200, Andreas J. Koenig wrote: On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:00:59 -0700, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Most CPAN smoke testers wouldn't have caught it because even though they often run alphas they usually don't install them. So the interactions with dependencies would be lost. Not true. My smokes would have caught it. And I'm very grateful. Certainly helped with DBI testing. Tim.
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:04:14 -0700, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Well, the repository trunk is always kept at passing so if folks want to smoke with that it's safe. Smoking repositories is not comparable with smoking release candidates. The number of possible collisions when smoking repositories against each other is close to infinity. Dev releases is the way to go. -- andreas
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On 9/23/07, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: would have the absolute latest release, even devs. You could set your CPAN.pm to pull from one or the other. If it goes this way, I'd at least want a command or something that lets me act against the alpha list as a one-off without having to edit my config. cpan alpha look Test::Harness cpan alpha report Test::Harness Let the debate on proper naming begin... David
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On Wednesday 19 September 2007 22:46:19 Ovid wrote: This has happened a couple of times now. Why don't you use release devel versions so that these issues become less serious in the future? In your experience, do devel versions get the kind of testing that would catch these issues sufficiently? In my experience, they don't. -- c
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
--- chromatic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 19 September 2007 22:46:19 Ovid wrote: This has happened a couple of times now. Why don't you use release devel versions so that these issues become less serious in the future? In your experience, do devel versions get the kind of testing that would catch these issues sufficiently? In my experience, they don't. For something as high profile as Test::Simple, it would get much more exposure than most modules. Plus, there wasn't much in the changelog which suggested this was a rush OMG Must Deliver Now sort of change (it had been six months since the last release). And it would be nice to have this run against a substantial portion of a minicpan install since breaking the toolchain is a very, very bad thing to do (as Schwern as *repeatedly* pounded into my head :) Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Perl and CGI - http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/ Personal blog - http://publius-ovidius.livejournal.com/ Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
On Thursday 20 September 2007 00:15:31 Ovid wrote: In your experience, do devel versions get the kind of testing that would catch these issues sufficiently? In my experience, they don't. For something as high profile as Test::Simple, it would get much more exposure than most modules. I dunno. Something as high profile as a bleadperl release (or a maintperl RC) doesn't get much testing. I have my doubts that most dev releases get *any* attention. -- c
Re: [ANNOUNCE] Test::Builder/More/Simple 0.72
--- Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Because of this I'm TEMPORARILY rolling the fix back at least a week to give CPAN authors a little breathing room to make their fixes. The fix is usually to plan in a BEGIN block. This has happened a couple of times now. Why don't you use release devel versions so that these issues become less serious in the future? Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Perl and CGI - http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/ Personal blog - http://publius-ovidius.livejournal.com/ Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
