Adam Kennedy writes: > Michael Graham wrote: > > > Another good reason to ship all of your development tests with code > > is that it makes it easer for users to submit patches with tests. > > Or to fork your code and retain all your development tools and > > methods. > > Perl::MinimumVersion, which doesn't exist yet, could check that the > version a module says it needs is higher than what Perl::MinimumVersion > can work out based on syntax alone. > > And it uses PPI... all 55 classes of it... which uses Class::Autouse, > which uses Class::Inspector, and prefork.pm, and Scalar::Util and > List::Util, oh and List::MoreUtils and a few other bits and pieces. > > I'm not going to push that giant nest of dependencies on people just so > they can install Chart::Math::Axis...
You don't have to -- have a test which depends on Perl::MinimumVersion, but which skips itself entirely if Perl::MinimumVersion isn't installed. Then anybody without all those dependencies isn't inconvenienced in the slightest -- but anybody who wants to patch the module can see the test's existence and choose to go to the effort of installing it if she so desires. (Note I'm not specifically agreeing with the point that shipping dev tests makes sense -- I think it's fine for some authors to choose to do so and some to choose not to; I'm merely disagreeing with the suggestion that shipping a dev test _necessarily_ imposes a burden on mere users of the module.) Smylers -- May God bless us with enough foolishness to believe that we can make a difference in this world, so that we can do what others claim cannot be done.
