On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Pete Krawczyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Third, there was no reason to cc the perl-qa mailing list. None at all. This
> list is for discussion of testing methods and applications, not for
> chastising the result of an automated smokebot.
Pete makes a good point.
Hi,
I've just put Test::Database 0.01 on PAUSE.
The current version is working with the easy stuff (DBD::CSV,
DBD::SQLite, DBD::DBM), but most of the interface is ready for
databases that need more than a file or a directory.
I'll work on the Test::Database::Driver::mysql for the next release.
On Wed, Oct 08, 2008 at 10:52:42AM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> There's plenty of modules which need a database,
> and they all have to be configured differently and they're always a PITA when
> you first install and each and every time they upgrade.
>
> User setup can be dealt with by mak
David Cantrell writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > It sounds scary to me. If I'm just installing a Perl module from
> > Cpan on a newly installed OS, which happens to still have default DB
> > connection permissions, I wouldn't expect the module's tests to
> > start making use of the DB without askin
First, in the notes comes this: 'this report is from an automated smoke
testing program and was not reviewed by a human for accuracy'. Thus, the
"you" is completely inappropriate. The bot may have not installed it, but
then again, it may not had to, because *a* module called Template may have
alrea
First, in the notes comes this: 'this report is from an automated smoke
testing program and was not reviewed by a human for accuracy'. Thus, the
"you" is completely inappropriate. The bot may have not installed it, but
then again, it may not had to, because *a* module called Template may have
alrea
