On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:30 AM, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> I agree partly (it can look, but should not add any
> dependencies), but I'm very unlikely to find some time to fix this in
> the next weeks (http://use.perl.org/~domm/journal/38260).
Understood. :-)
> But of course, patches welcome (eg
Hi!
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 10:04:58AM -0500, David Golden wrote:
> That's absurd. The Kwalitee analyzer shouldn't look in xt. Period.
I agree partly (it can look, but should not add any
dependencies), but I'm very unlikely to find some time to fix this in
the next weeks (http://use.perl.or
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Marc Lucksch wrote:
> Sorry, that previous post sounded way to agressive, this is probably because
> I'm not english speaker (Worst in my class and proud of it) and my
Don't worry, I was not offended.
> Yes, but I kind of want to deliver the best module I can pro
Sorry, that previous post sounded way to agressive, this is probably
because I'm not english speaker (Worst in my class and proud of it) and
my "diplomatic english" suffers from this shortcoming. This is
aggravated by my try to cut back on smilies lately. Again sorry for
that. I just tried to e
It seems like I started too many discussions at once (again), like I
always do. Sorry for that.
Michael G Schwern schrieb:
[snip] but I'm also quite happy with encouraging the idea that
> testing *is* part of the build process.
Really no argument there.
Though I agree the lack of build_re
Marc Lucksch wrote:
> If you are pedantic about this, you could even argue that testing itself is
> _not_
> a requirement for the whole build process. (Just don't run make test)
It compiles, ship it!
I've argued for test_requires and test_recommends in the past, but I'm also
quite happy with enc
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Marc Lucksch wrote:
> And what about the optional Test::NoWarnings?
> If it isn't in build_requires, I get bad kwalitee, if its there, the module
> will be installed without being really needed. If I hide it with trickery
> from being detected, I will fail the *use
David Golden schrieb:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Marc Lucksch wrote:
So there are two ways to solve this:
Either remove them from the Kwalitee indicator (which would be bad).
This is the right answer. Things required for xt should not be in
build_requires as they do not impact the bui
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 7:43 AM, Marc Lucksch wrote:
> So there are two ways to solve this:
>
> Either remove them from the Kwalitee indicator (which would be bad).
This is the right answer. Things required for xt should not be in
build_requires as they do not impact the build/test/install cycle
