CPAN Testers

  • About: This is the new account for incidental and summary updates to what's happening with the CPAN Testers. For all the latest news and views please see our blog.
Subscribe to feed Recent Actions from CPAN Testers

  • exodist7 commented on Test::More has lots of crazy new development that's breaking my modules

    As the person making the Test::More changes, I have to agree with this idea:

    Failures due to alpha versions of Test::More should not be red marks against OTHER modules that in no way took action to cause the problem.

    If I had known they did show up there I probably would have been reluctant to release these alphas. The alphas are valuable and help me find a lot of issues... but I don't want other people to be dinged from them. I myself judge modules based on the pass/fail ratio in cpan testers.

    At the very least these should be unknown, not fail (in metacpan/cpan dis…

  • Ether commented on CPAN Testers & pre-requisite reporting

    > The "DEVREL" prefix will be appended as soon as there is *anything* in the chain

    I like this a lot, and it's similar to what I was thinking too. However, I realize now there's a problem here -- the release status of a module can't always be determined from the module itself (at least, not the $VERSION) - you need the distribution metadata to determine that.

    There is one (relatively) simple way to handle misdirected failures, however -- allow a mechanism to redirect them. We've already got nearly that, with the new admin site -- just modify the interface to allow redirectin…

  • exodist7 commented on CPAN Testers & pre-requisite reporting

    I agree with Peter Rabbitsons solution, I left a comment to that same effect in the original post.

    I am the one making these Test::More changes, and I would have been a lot more reluctant to make these alpha releases if I know it would give other people red marks. I myself judge modules based on red vs green counts.

  • Peter Rabbitson commented on CPAN Testers & pre-requisite reporting

    I still maintain that "oh, changing the set of test tags beyond the current 4 is too hard" is a dead-end strategy. In order to remain relevant the cpantesters infrastructure must allow for extra test-type additions anyway - the current set is too limited.

    In addition I do not believe (given I know and admire the skill of everyone involved) that the current stack is written so badly, that it will be a monumental effort to allow for "super-namespacing" of the test results. At worst it should be a couple day slog, perfect for a hackathon... if there only was an upcoming one ;)


  • Andreas Koenig commented on CPAN Testers & pre-requisite reporting

    Is this discussion probably just about limitations we have, as individuals and as a community? I see it that we have microcosmoses of people and modules and interactions between individual entities. Whenever some combination of those does not work we get some sort of problem and impact. And what we do about it is to watch carefully bad interactions so we can countersteer. More tags? What a brilliant idea if everybody could tag in advance what a release would break. But why release at all, then? If people could tag their software as broken in advance, why would they not fix their crap…

Subscribe to feed Responses to Comments from CPAN Testers

About is a common blogging platform for the Perl community. Written in Perl with a graphic design donated by Six Apart, Ltd.