RE: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Clayton, Nik
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 08:33:48PM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote: > > A quickie sample implementation to add more meat. I didn't apply yet > > mainly because I'm wondering if we shouldn't bail and do a complete > > roll-back (eg. don't generate a Build script) if there are any failed > > require

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Randy W. Sims
Clayton, Nik wrote: On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 08:33:48PM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote: A quickie sample implementation to add more meat. I didn't apply yet mainly because I'm wondering if we shouldn't bail and do a complete roll-back (eg. don't generate a Build script) if there are any failed requir

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 06:12:37AM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote: > Both. We could fail by default, but allow an option to force it to > ignore missing or conflicting dependencies: Duh. Why didn't I think of that? Of course!

Phalanx

2005-03-30 Thread Walter Goulet
Hi, Ok, so I've been trying to get started with testing Net-SSLeay for the Phalanx project. Now the problem I've been having is getting my arms around how to improve the coverage of the tests included with that module. It doesn't look like this module uses the t/ framework, rather a series of s

Re: Phalanx

2005-03-30 Thread Andy Lester
et started with testing Net-SSLeay for the Phalanx project. Now the problem I've been having is getting my arms around how to improve the coverage of the tests included with that module. It doesn't look like this module uses the t/ framework, rather a series of scripts in a given subdirectory

Re: Phalanx

2005-03-30 Thread Gabor Szabo
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:45:23 -0600, Walter Goulet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Ok, so I've been trying to get started with testing Net-SSLeay for the > Phalanx project. Now the problem I've been having is getting my arms > around how to improve the coverage of the tests included with that

Re: Phalanx

2005-03-30 Thread Walter Goulet
Gabor Szabo wrote: On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 21:45:23 -0600, Walter Goulet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, Ok, so I've been trying to get started with testing Net-SSLeay for the Phalanx project. Now the problem I've been having is getting my arms around how to improve the coverage of the tests included

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Randy W. Sims
Ken Williams wrote: On a related note, we should probably finally make the prerequisite-specification system treat the requirement level (requires vs. recommends vs. conflicts) and requirement scope (build vs. test vs. runtime) as completely orthogonal. Currently there's no such thing as build

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Ken Williams
On Mar 30, 2005, at 4:53 PM, Randy W. Sims wrote: Should we completely open this up so that requires/recommends/conflicts can be applied to any action? install_recommends => ... testcover_requires => ... etc. I like it. But for some reason I find it a little scary. Doing this would require a lit

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

2005-03-30 Thread Michael G Schwern
On Wed, Mar 30, 2005 at 05:53:37PM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote: > Should we completely open this up so that requires/recommends/conflicts > can be applied to any action? > > install_recommends => ... > testcover_requires => ... > etc. This sounds useful and solves a lot of problems at one sweep.