The First International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and
Validation is happening in Lillehammer, Norway April 9 - 11. The conference
proper is April 10th and 11th, just after Go Open and the Oslo QA Hackathon.
I think this is a good chance for Perl QA to crash the IEEE and get
chromatic wrote:
On Monday 03 March 2008 11:20:54 Michael G Schwern wrote:
"Fixage" is when software fixes a bug and reveals bugs in dependent
software.
Test-Simple 0.77 (which includes Test::More) fixed a long standing bug by
removing the annoying global $SIG{__DIE__} handler to trap test dea
David Golden wrote:
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * parsing for error messages from code like "use 5.008" or from "our"
> being used in $VERSION strings prior to 5.005
It's that last one that concerns me, it's a bit heuristicy and I've been
t
On Monday 03 March 2008 11:20:54 Michael G Schwern wrote:
> "Fixage" is when software fixes a bug and reveals bugs in dependent
> software.
>
> Test-Simple 0.77 (which includes Test::More) fixed a long standing bug by
> removing the annoying global $SIG{__DIE__} handler to trap test death.
Having
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:04 PM, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * parsing for error messages from code like "use 5.008" or from "our"
> > being used in $VERSION strings prior to 5.005
>
> It's that last one that concerns me, it's a bit heuristicy and I've been
> things be decla
I'm coining a new term, "fixage", like "breakage".
"Fixage" is when software fixes a bug and reveals bugs in dependent software.
Test-Simple 0.77 (which includes Test::More) fixed a long standing bug by
removing the annoying global $SIG{__DIE__} handler to trap test death. It
would swallow th
David Golden wrote:
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It would be nice if NA's included the reason for it being an NA, that being
the full Makefile/Build.PL output just like if it failed. I don't see any
harm in that and it would help identify acci
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 05:21:47PM +, Smylers wrote:
> $ man chattr
> No manual entry for chattr
>
> $ man lsattr
> No manual entry for lsattr
>
> That's on a FreeBSD server. Let's try Linux. Ah, yes:
>
> $ whatis chattr
> chattr (1) - change file attributes on a Lin
Brad Oaks writes:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > demerphq writes:
> >
> > > It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
> > > be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
> >
> > I think that can be r
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Smylers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> demerphq writes:
>
> > It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
> > be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
>
> I think that can be reduced to: It isn't possible to crea
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It would be nice if NA's included the reason for it being an NA, that being
> the full Makefile/Build.PL output just like if it failed. I don't see any
> harm in that and it would help identify accidental NAs.
Ther
Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 02:19:23PM +, Smylers wrote:
demerphq writes:
It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
I think that can be reduced to: It isn't possible to creat
demerphq wrote:
On 03/03/2008, David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:57 AM, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMO if an NA result comes in without email contact details and without
> an explanation for the NA then the result should not be aggregated
> against
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 02:19:23PM +, Smylers wrote:
> demerphq writes:
>
> > It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
> > be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
>
> I think that can be reduced to: It isn't possible to create a direct
demerphq writes:
> It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
> be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
I think that can be reduced to: It isn't possible to create a directory
that is not writeable by root. The whole point of root is that a
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:50 AM, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It turned out the problem is that when the tests are root it seems to
> be not possible to create a directory that is not writeable by root.
> Our test is verifying some private logic that checks if a directory is
> writeable
On 03/03/2008, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 03/03/2008, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 3 Mar 2008, at 12:24, demerphq wrote:
> > > Chris has since explained on IRC that this is a CPANPLUS bug that is
> > > tickled by the fact that I put "Config" in the EU::Install
On 03/03/2008, Andy Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 3 Mar 2008, at 12:24, demerphq wrote:
> > Chris has since explained on IRC that this is a CPANPLUS bug that is
> > tickled by the fact that I put "Config" in the EU::Install
> > prerequisite list so ill be uploading a new release shor
On 3 Mar 2008, at 12:24, demerphq wrote:
Chris has since explained on IRC that this is a CPANPLUS bug that is
tickled by the fact that I put "Config" in the EU::Install
prerequisite list so ill be uploading a new release shortly.
The CPANPLUS bug is the reason you got an NA rather than a FAIL
On 03/03/2008, David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:57 AM, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > IMO if an NA result comes in without email contact details and without
> > an explanation for the NA then the result should not be aggregated
> > against the module
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:57 AM, demerphq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IMO if an NA result comes in without email contact details and without
> an explanation for the NA then the result should not be aggregated
> against the module.
The email contact details are there, just suppressed by the NNT
On 3 Mar 2008, at 11:59, Andy Armstrong wrote:
On 3 Mar 2008, at 11:57, demerphq wrote:
At this point im wondering if this tester is just sending NA for
everything, but i cant find a way to find all of their reports.
That'll be BinGOs. Most of the test reports that exist are from him :)
http
On 3 Mar 2008, at 11:57, demerphq wrote:
At this point im wondering if this tester is just sending NA for
everything, but i cant find a way to find all of their reports.
That'll be BinGOs. Most of the test reports that exist are from him :)
http://perl.grango.org/testers.html
--
Andy Armstro
Ok, now that my subject line has got your attention
WTF is the deal with NA results with NO information, NO way to contact
the tester, and from what I can tell NO validity.
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/03/msg1098294.html
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.tester
24 matches
Mail list logo
