On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 16:46 +, Mark Stosberg wrote:
> Hello,
Hello,
>
> I've been working on a Perl test suite for darcs, with notable recent
> help from Schwern.
>
> We used to have tests that looked like this:
>
>like(`echo y | darcs command`,qr/$re/);
>
> That would run the comma
Hi!
On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
> There are now two kwalitee tests for 'has_test_pod' and
> 'has_test_pod_coverage'. These check that there are test scripts for
> POD correctness and POD coverage.
Actually they check if Test::Pod and Test::Pod::Coverage are used
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 21:00 +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2005 at 11:40:45AM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
> > We should be very wary of stipulating HOW authors have to achieve their
> > quality. Saying you can only check your POD in one specific way goes to
> > far IMO.
>
> That'
Hi!
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 10:59:04AM -0800, chromatic wrote:
> Why, then, is suggesting that people ship tests for POD errors and
> coverage a good idea?
I'm not 100% sure if it's a good idea, but it's an idea.
But then, if I write some test (eg to check pod coverage), why should I not
ship
Hi,
I've been in contact with the author of Net-SSLeay about testing his
module. One limitation I have to work with is that the module has to
work out of the box with perl 5.6.0 which doesn't include the
Test::Simple and Test::More modules.
I guess this limits me to using the old Test module. He
On Fri, 2005-04-01 at 21:43 +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> But then, if I write some test (eg to check pod coverage), why should I not
> ship them? It's a good feeling to let others know that I took some extra
> effort to make sure everything works.
If I use Devel::Cover to check my test coverag
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 09:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > We should be very wary of stipulating HOW authors have to achieve their
> > quality. Saying you can only check your POD in one specific way goes to
> > far IMO.
> That's a good point.
> OTOH, I know of several people who added Pod
Walter Goulet wrote:
Hi,
I've been in contact with the author of Net-SSLeay about testing his
module. One limitation I have to work with is that the module has to
work out of the box with perl 5.6.0 which doesn't include the
Test::Simple and Test::More modules.
I guess this limits me to using the o
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 09:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> Anyway, I invite everybody to suggest new metrics
I'd like the "is pre-req" thing to be more useful. Rather than a binary
yes/no thing (and the abuses it leads to), I'd rather have something
akin to Google's Page Rank, where the s
On Mar 30, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
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 an
On Mar 29, 2005, at 10:44 PM, Randy W. Sims wrote:
Michael G Schwern 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
My impression from the author was that he didn't want me bundling any
additional modules with Net-SSLeay. Maybe I don't fully understand
your suggestion...
On Apr 1, 2005 2:07 PM, Randy W. Sims <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Walter Goulet wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been in contact with the author o
Ken Williams wrote:
Since the 'build', 'test', and 'install' actions are considered the
"critical path" for installing a module, I think it makes sense to warn
(not die) during "perl Build.PL" when one of their
required/recommended/conflict dependencies aren't met. Thereafter, only
die/warn wh
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 01:47:36PM -0600, Walter Goulet wrote:
> Finally, I wanted to confirm an assumption: I can split test.pl into a
> set of seperate t/*.t test scripts regardless of whether I'm using
> Test or Test::More.
Yes. Or neither or both.
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http:/
Ken Williams wrote:
On Mar 30, 2005, at 6:16 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
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.
Th
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 01:47:36PM -0600, Walter Goulet ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> I've been in contact with the author of Net-SSLeay about testing his
> module. One limitation I have to work with is that the module has to
> work out of the box with perl 5.6.0 which doesn't include the
> Test::S
Why is there a scoreboard? Why do we care about rankings? Why is it
necessary to compare one measure to another? What purpose is being
served?
xoxo,
Andy
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
Well ok, but then you have to pull it off of the Phalanx 100. Either
that, or we convince the author of the benefits of upgrading the
testing infrastructure. I'm not sure what is driving him to keep the
module compatible with 5.6.0 (especially since the testing modules
were added to 5.6.2).
On Apr
On Apr 1, 2005, at 2:55 PM, Christopher H. Laco wrote:
If build, test, and install are considered the critical path, why was
Build/make never changed to simple run "test" always as part of the
builds success or failure?
Just curious. In a way, I'd be much happier if 'perl Build' or 'make'
outri
Tony Bowden wrote:
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 09:00:17PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
Anyway, I invite everybody to suggest new metrics
I'd like the "is pre-req" thing to be more useful. Rather than a binary
yes/no thing (and the abuses it leads to), I'd rather have something
akin to Google's Page Ra
On Fri, Apr 01, 2005 at 03:30:44PM -0600, Andy Lester wrote:
> Why is there a scoreboard? Why do we care about rankings? Why is it
> necessary to compare one measure to another? What purpose is being
> served?
I presume you mean the CPAN scoreboard? Or maybe the Kwalitee scoreboard,
it doesn't
Another way to look at it is sometimes its useful to just play with
the data,
graph it in different ways and see what comes out. Maybe nothing
comes out.
Maybe something does. Publish the results, see what happens.
I understand that, but it seems to have gone past playing data.
I'm just not com
22 matches
Mail list logo
