On 11 Dec 2007, at 15:33, David Golden wrote:
http://dagolden.googlecode.com/svn/CPAN-Reporter/trunk/
If it has t/56_test_report_harness_versions.t then you've got the
version with the fixes. If you don't see that, then I'm still working
on it.
Thanks David - I'll keep an eye out for it.
--
> > * test.pl, no output, exit 0 -> EU::MM says pass, M::B says unknown
> > * test.pl, no output, exit 1 -> EU::MM says fail, M::B says unknown
For clarity, let me add the following cases (where T::H < 3.05 includes 2.XX):
* foo.t, no output, exit 0 -> T::H < 3.05 says unknown, T::H 3.05 says fai
On 11 Dec 2007, at 14:18, David Golden wrote:
ExtUtils::MakeMake and Module::Build treat test.pl differently.
EU::MM just runs it and uses the exit code. M::B passes it to
Test::Harness. Thus, a test.pl with no output (i.e no plan) has
different behavior under each:
* test.pl, no output, exit
On Dec 4, 2007 6:37 PM, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> > Bug in CPAN::Reporter and/or Test::Harness and/or CPAN.pm?
> >
> > http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/796974
> > http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/825449
> >
> > All
On 11 Dec 2007, at 05:12, Michael G Schwern wrote:
Adam Kennedy posed me a stumper on #toolchain tonight. In short,
having a
test which checks your signature doesn't appear to be an actual
deterrent to
tampering. The man-in-the-middle can just delete the test, or just
the
SIGNATURE file
Anyone written any CPAN modules for which the testing coverage needs to be
improved ?
Want someone else to sort this out for you ?
Milton Keynes PM want to start working together to contribute to the Perl
development effort and as we need to do something that beginners and experts
can both work
