Re: On Not Merging new and old behavior ( was Re: Test-Stream + MongoDB scalar refcount issue )

On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 7:31 PM, David Golden x...@xdg.me wrote: On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Kent Fredric kentfred...@gmail.com wrote: That is, conceptually, its possible that a misguided author of a distribution at the same level as say, Test::Differences, thinks it wise to simply

Re: CPAN River - water quality metric

I have to agree with that, albeit probably less angry about it. :) On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Karen Etheridge wrote: > > I think “has a META.yml or META.json” is worth keeping in > > I'm surprised this one is being discussed at all. IMO, not having a META > file should

Re: CPAN River - water quality metric

[top-posted] Further context as someone maintaining distributions with long-running issues. There are many reasons an issue could stay open for a long time: * It requires much more consideration (and could relate to multiple branches of reference implementation or different steps along the way)

Re: Should Test2 maintain $! and $@?

[Top-posting] Chad, I think I understand what you mean now. You were referring to whether the underlying pinnings should take care of it (Test2) or whether the chrome (testing functions) around that should do so. Yes? If so, I think you should probably clarify what Test2 *does* do. It doesn't

Re: Should Test2 maintain $! and $@?

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Kent Fredric <kentfred...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 January 2016 at 10:48, Sawyer X <xsawy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> If so, I think you should probably clarify what Test2 *does* do. It >> doesn't provide the functions

Re: Should Test2 maintain $! and $@?

[Top-posted] Chad, thank you for the detailed response. I think I now understand the scope of the problem and your solutions. I think it makes sense to put this in the guts inside the construction of a new context (or retrieval of current context) and in the release of that context. Kent, am I

Re: Should Test2 maintain $! and $@?

[Top-posted] The extra cost would be: 1. Array storage 2. Push 3. Pop At the cost of supporting any level of nesting, I think it's a negligible cost, but I would profile it. On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 7:50 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > On 14 January 2016 at 07:39, Chad Granum

Re: Renaming the "QA Hackathon"?

Merging the suggestions I saw so far: Perl Annual Critical Infrastructure Summit. A mouthful, and not a fun acronym. On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:16 PM, Karen Etheridge wrote: > When I saw this thread title I thought it was going to be discussing the > "QA" part of it, and I

Re: Thoughts on Kik and NPM and implications for CPAN

Well thought-out. I agree. (I'd add more but really, there's no need. :) On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 4:07 PM, David Golden wrote: > If you don't know what I'm referring to, read > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/23/npm_left_pad_chaos/ > > Leaving aside the IP issue, I think it

Re: Thoughts on Kik and NPM and implications for CPAN

Related to this perhaps was the Ion3 debacle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion_%28window_manager%29#Controversy Long story short: Ion3 developer did not want a certain feature. Debian added a patch for it. He got mad, pulled Ion3 out. Same with ArchLinux, NetBSD, and FreeBSD. On Wed, Mar 23,

Re: Found rare bug in Pod::Simple

On Sat, Mar 5, 2016 at 9:56 PM, Neil Bowers wrote: > [...] > As you can see, it first checks for no extension. Also note that it’s not > checking for the ‘.plx’ extension, which survey handles. I’ve never come > across anyone using the .plx extensions, but I guess for a

YAML (maybe other modules) might need CPAN smoking

YAML broke some stuff. I'm beginning to think that YAML is one of the modules that could really use a CPAN smoke of its own. I think the more upriver the module, the more this becomes relevant. Thoughts?

Re: YAML (maybe other modules) might need CPAN smoking

r is tool chain. > > On Jul 5, 2016 8:14 AM, "Sawyer X" <xsawy...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> YAML broke some stuff. >> >> I'm beginning to think that YAML is one of the modules that could >> really use a CPAN smoke of its own. I think the more upriver the >> module, the more this becomes relevant. >> >> Thoughts?

Re: YAML (maybe other modules) might need CPAN smoking

I agree. On Jul 5, 2016 18:43, "Karen Etheridge" <p...@froods.org> wrote: > There should be -TRIAL releases of anything this far upriver, at the very > least. > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Sawyer X <xsawy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> YAML.pm. >