On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:27 PM, David Golden wrote:
I'm not being snide. I've heard what you don't want. I hope that you
see that there is interest in making things better.
In no particular order:
I want nothing in my inbox that I have not explicitly requested.
I want to choose how I get rep
At
http://thenceforward.net/parrot/coverage/configure-build/coverage.html I
have for over a year displayed the results of coverage analysis on
Parrot's configuration and build tools.
I have come to realize that while these reports are very useful for me
as the maintainer of the Perl 5 aspect
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 02:21:23PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Andrew Moore wrote:
> >Do these two things help make the CPAN Testers stuff more useful or at
> >least less annoying for you?
> The only thing that will make CPAN Testers less annoying at this point
> is if
>On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 12:04:45AM -0700, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
>> My examination of the .meta files in the cpan says [correction: 2286]
>> distributions have a META.yml with 'generated_by' citing
>> Module::Build. To my knowledge, the testing of pre-release versions
>> does not extend to building
Hi all,
I just realized that my meta.yml extractor was counting each dist once
for every module in the dist (just going through 02packages.details.txt
line by line => duh!)
Has anyone seen Randy Sims? His site had something like this at one
point, but thepierianspring.org => ENOIP!
So, my ha
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 06:50:37PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:09:20AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> > I fail to understand ...
> that much is obvious
> [etc]
My apologies chromatic, I shouldn't have lost my temper and said that.
--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers
# from David Golden
# on Thursday 04 September 2008 11:30:
>On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I fail to understand the mechanism by which CPAN Testers has
>> seemingly removed the ability of testers to report bugs to the
>> correct places. For example,
>
>I t
On Thursday 04 September 2008 10:50:37 David Cantrell wrote:
> Maybe I should start being equally loud and obnoxious about obviously
> stupid and broken things like the existence of UNIVERSAL-isa. It might
> give you some appreciation for how you're coming across here.
UNIVERSAL::isa and UNIVERS
Citeren Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Sep 4, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
It's not an entitlement, it's a shared goal of making Perl better. If a
maintainer is going to ignore test reports, perhaps its time to add a
co-maintainer.
Yes, something that indicates the age
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only thing that will make CPAN Testers less annoying at this point is if
> I am ASKED WHAT I WANT, instead of being told "Here's what we're doing and
> dammit, you should like it!"
You're right, Andy. I was being sort of
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The only thing that will make CPAN Testers less annoying at this point is if
> I am ASKED WHAT I WANT, instead of being told "Here's what we're doing and
> dammit, you should like it!"
Andy,
What do you want?
More precisely
On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:11 PM, Andrew Moore wrote:
Do these two things help make the CPAN Testers stuff more useful or at
least less annoying for you?
The only thing that will make CPAN Testers less annoying at this point
is if I am ASKED WHAT I WANT, instead of being told "Here's what we're
Hi Andy -
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:53 PM, Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why should I release my software on CPAN if part of the price of entry is
> being spammed and told what I should be doing?
Although the remark about CPAN authors' jobs was worded less than
optimally, part of the co
On Thursday 04 September 2008 11:30:51 David Golden wrote:
> It shouldn't be any big deal to report a failure -- once -- to an
> author. That's just the normal bug-report cycle as an author might
> get from any human user. Author can look into it (if they care to),
> decide if it's a legitimate
On Sep 4, 2008, at 1:33 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
It's not an entitlement, it's a shared goal of making Perl better.
If a
maintainer is going to ignore test reports, perhaps its time to add a
co-maintainer.
Yes, something that indicates the age and number of open bugs for a
module, th
> I may do so because I take the quality and utility of my software
> seriously, but do not mistake that for anything which may instill in you
> any sort of entitlement. That is an excellent way not to get what you
> want from me.
It's not an entitlement, it's a shared goal of making Perl better
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 1:09 PM, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I fail to understand the mechanism by which CPAN Testers has seemingly removed
> the ability of testers to report bugs to the correct places. For example,
I think it's a mistake to set this up as just an author-vs-tester
zero-
On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:50 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
I fail to understand ...
that much is obvious
And here we have the core problem. chromatic, among others, have
expressed frustration about CPAN Testers. The reaction has never been
positive. Here, chromatic is insulted for simply s
> > Sorry, but paying attention is the author's job. A fail is something
> > that should be fixed, period, regardless of the number of them.
>
> According to who? Who's to say what my job as an author is?
Obviously I should be semantically careful: "job" and "author" are
overloaded words. How
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 10:09:20AM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> I fail to understand ...
that much is obvious
> ... the mechanism by which CPAN Testers has seemingly removed
> the ability of testers to report bugs to the correct places.
What a lovely straw man! Even nicer than the
On Thursday 04 September 2008 08:30:19 Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> Sorry, but paying attention is the author's job. A fail is something that
> should be fixed, period, regardless of the number of them.
My job is editor, not programmer. Also novelist -- but again, not programmer.
Certainly not
On Thursday 04 September 2008 01:19:44 Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> Let's pretend that I'm a real jerk of an author and I only care about
> whether my code installs on a perl 5.8.8+ (a *real* perl -- no funky
> vendor patches) with a fully updated and properly configured toolchain
> and the clock set to
On Sep 4, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
So the more successful CPAN Testers is in attracting new testers, the
more duplicate FAIL reports authors are likely to receive, which
makes
them less likely to pay attention to them.
Sorry, but paying attention is the author's job. A
Two cents from someone who appreciates the hell out of the CPAN testing
service and eagerly awaits new reports every time I release a new version
of a module.
> However, from author's perspective, if a report is legitimate (and
> assuming they care), they really only need to hear it once. Having
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 4:56 AM, Shlomi Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "-j2" is invalid for ./Build and you shouldn't use it with it. Alternatively,
> you can use "perl Makefile.PL ; make ; ", etc., which is also supported by
> the Error distribution.
>
> But as it stands, you're giving many fals
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 4:19 AM, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Some of these proposal would be easier in CPAN Testers 2.0, which will
>>provide reports as structured data instead of email text, but if "exit
>>0" is a straw that is breaking the Perl camel's back now, then we
>>can't ignor
> On Wed, 3 Sep 2008 13:24:34 -0700, Eric Wilhelm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> That is different than a tarball though. Does the script installation
> have to be given up in order to eliminate the ambiguous behavior in the
> case of a dist tarball?
Good point. I can probably limit it
Hi!
In regards to:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/09/msg2127117.html
It is obvious that you try to run ./Build like this:
shlomi:~/progs/perl/cpan/Error/trunk/module$ ./Build -j2
No action '-j2' defined, try running the 'help' action.
"-j2" is invalid f
# from David Golden
# on Wednesday 03 September 2008 14:09:
> if ... CPAN Testers is ...
> to help authors improve quality
> rather than ...
> to give users a guarantee about ... any given platform.
>
>... "high quality" author -- ... tester has a broken or misconfigured
>toolchain The false
Hi all,
Module::Build hasn't shipped a proper release for a good while, and a
few alphas have gone out since then (including the one in 5.10.0). Now
I find myself apparently expected to ship it.
My examination of the .meta files in the cpan says 9095 distributions
have a META.yml with 'genera
30 matches
Mail list logo
