Re: Is a CPAN testers release reasonable?

2010-04-19 Thread Barbie
On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 11:08:00AM -0400, David Golden wrote: On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 6:25 PM, Barbie bar...@missbarbell.co.uk wrote: I fundamentally disagree with those kind of heuristics, which is why I haven't implemented them in CPAN::Reporter. Why? If an OS specific distribution

Re: Is a CPAN testers release reasonable?

2010-04-19 Thread David Golden
I'm *very* sympathetic to you feeling on the firing line and would like to avoid that. I think we're in a much better place due to not emailing authors directly and providing them with easy options to set notification preferences. Plus we point them to the FAQ. Let's pick up the conversation

Re: Is a CPAN testers release reasonable?

2010-04-19 Thread Barbie
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 07:20:49AM -0400, David Golden wrote: I'm *very* sympathetic to you feeling on the firing line and would like to avoid that. I think we're in a much better place due to not emailing authors directly and providing them with easy options to set notification preferences.

Re: Is a CPAN testers release reasonable?

2010-04-19 Thread David Cantrell
On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 11:44:05AM -0400, Bill Birthisel wrote: I am the author of the Win32::SerialPort module. As one would expect from the name, it only runs properly on Win32. So the last update generated several false failures. The next update will add a $^O test and fix the

Re: Is a CPAN testers release reasonable?

2010-04-19 Thread Bill Birthisel
There is also the problem of installing on a perl release that predates Devel::AssertOS. Win32::SerialPort works fine on 5.6.0 (actually version 0.19 worked fine on 5.003 - but I no longer have a test bed for that). I will add the $^O test directly and bail from Makefile.PL if it fails (with the