On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 12:56:56AM -0700, Serguei Trouchelle wrote:
> Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> > I'm not advocating of throwing everything before 5.12, but I think that
> > version 5.8.9 if the earliest we should accept.
>
> I know one Fortune 50 company who runs Perl 5.8.5 in production.
Happy B
On Sat, Jul 09, 2011 at 01:03:49AM -0700, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> # from David Golden
> >On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:23 AM, David Cantrell wrote:
> >> ... the complete lack of a reasonable set of
> >> tools on Windows, which just makes me angry whenever I have to
> >> touch the blasted thing, made me st
On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 4:03 AM, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> Not to mention the general case of a CPAN author, where you can't assume
> that they could be bothered to *obtain* a windows/mac OS, let alone
I think you're missing the point of my post, which was to offer a way
for people to try it without a
Eric Wilhelm wrote:
With a VM install, you still have to wade through the boggy experience
of mousing-around in a completely foreign environment while swearing at
the shell for being completely unreasonable about everything.
I know that Norton Commander clones generally are not used anywhere o
# from David Golden
# on Saturday 02 July 2011 03:51:
>On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:23 AM, David Cantrell wrote:
>> ... the complete lack of a reasonable set of
>> tools* on Windows, which just makes me angry whenever I have to
>> touch the blasted thing, made me stop.
>>
>> * starting with a useable
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 5:35 PM, wrote:
> This all brings up a point about maintenance of Perl: it is one thing to not
> release new features in 5.10.1 it is another to say since we have already 514
> we won't consider bug fix releases for 5.10.1
>
> Bundling stuff into core and making bug fixes
ct Connect
-Original Message-
From: Serguei Trouchelle
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 14:01:35
To:
Subject: Re: Making sure your module works on other OS-es as well
Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
>>> Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
>>> I think that there is someone who is runn
John M. Gamble wrote:
Just to be clear: If I have a perl requirement of, say, 5.10 in my
META.yml, the
smokers will skip testing with all versions of 5.6 and 5.8?
Yes. NA report will be sent, no testing or even attempting to build the module
will be made.
What if the distribution is old and
Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
I think that there is someone who is running a smoker on Perl 5.6. do we
want authors to get error reports because some feature that they used
does not exists or was buggy on that version?
These reports clearly indicate
On 2011/07/04 1:34, David Cantrell wrote:
Likewise, if authors don't wish to be notified about reports, they can
customize notification on the preferences site:
https://prefs.cpantesters.org/
nice. never knew about this option before.
Authors are told about it in the summary emails they receive
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 09:30:49AM +0900, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> On 2011/07/03 8:50, David Golden wrote:
> >If authors don't want failure reports on ancient Perls, they are
> >advised to be explicit with "use 5.006" or "use 5.008009" or whatever
> >is the earliest version they choose to support.
>
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 08:40:02AM +0900, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> On 2011/07/03 1:02, David Cantrell wrote:
> >>Oh, and by the way, can someone make the server reject report from
> >>ancient Perl versions?
> >Why?
> Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
No it doesn't. It merely tells
On 7/3/2011 6:40 AM, Barbie wrote:
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 07:42:42PM +0900, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
The point is that CPAN deprecation should lag behind Perl
deprecation policy.
It does. Testers do upgrade over time. The oldest perl currently tested
is 5.6.2, up until about 18 months ago we wer
> -Original Message-
> From: Gabor Szabo [mailto:szab...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2011 7:33 AM
> To: Shmuel Fomberg
> Cc: module-authors@perl.org
> Subject: Re: Making sure your module works on other OS-es as well
>
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 6:29 PM,
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 07:42:42PM +0900, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> On 2011/07/03 16:56, Serguei Trouchelle wrote:
> >
> >>Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
> >>I think that there is someone who is running a smoker on Perl 5.6. do we
> >>want authors to get error reports because some
On 2011/07/03 16:56, Serguei Trouchelle wrote:
Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
I think that there is someone who is running a smoker on Perl 5.6. do we
want authors to get error reports because some feature that they used
does not exists or was buggy on that version?
These re
Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
Oh, and by the way, can someone make the server reject report from
ancient Perl versions?
Why?
Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
I think that there is someone who is running a smoker on Perl 5.6. do we
want authors to get error reports because some fe
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 6:29 PM, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> Hi Gabor.
>>
>> 3) running external perl scripts
>>
>> Code like this (in a test)
>>
>> `path/to/other/perl/script param param`
>>
>> is not a good idea on Linux either as this will use the perl in the
>> sh-bang
>> instead of the "curren
On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> On 2011/07/03 8:50, David Golden wrote:
>
>> If authors don't want failure reports on ancient Perls, they are
>> advised to be explicit with "use 5.006" or "use 5.008009" or whatever
>> is the earliest version they choose to support.
>
> Let'
On 2011/07/03 8:50, David Golden wrote:
If authors don't want failure reports on ancient Perls, they are
advised to be explicit with "use 5.006" or "use 5.008009" or whatever
is the earliest version they choose to support.
Let's file it under 'do the right thing by default'.
Of course an author
On Sat, Jul 2, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> On 2011/07/03 1:02, David Cantrell wrote:
>>>
>>> Oh, and by the way, can someone make the server reject report from
>>> ancient Perl versions?
>>
>> Why?
>
> Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
> I think that there is someone
On 2011/07/03 1:02, David Cantrell wrote:
Oh, and by the way, can someone make the server reject report from
ancient Perl versions?
Why?
Because it gives the feeling that we support them.
I think that there is someone who is running a smoker on Perl 5.6. do we
want authors to get error reports
On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 12:13:19AM +0900, Shmuel Fomberg wrote:
> Oh, and by the way, can someone make the server reject report from
> ancient Perl versions?
Why?
--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig
Perl: the only language that makes Welsh look acceptable
On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 12:17:23PM +0300, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> I am sorry I did not mean to offend you.
Don't worry, you didn't :-)
However ...
> Thank you for you consideration of the other 80% of people who are
> still using Windows.
I would expect that well over 95% of people who even consi
Hi Gabor.
3) running external perl scripts
Code like this (in a test)
`path/to/other/perl/script param param`
is not a good idea on Linux either as this will use the perl in the sh-bang
instead of the "current" perl which is running the tests.
These might be different version of Perl.
Bt
Hi Gabor.
some of you might know that Perl is quite underrepresented in the Windows
world. So although my main OS is Linux I thought giving a hand there might
be interesting. Therefore recently I started to run a CPAN smoker
http://www.cpantesters.org/ on a Windows XP machine running Strawbe
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 9:23 AM, David Cantrell wrote:
> I went through a period of trying to make sure my code worked on
> Windows, but I've given up. Not because it's hard to do - it generally
> isn't - but the complete lack of a reasonable set of tools* on Windows,
> which just makes me angry w
Lovely, so now instead of talking about "how to make sure our modules
work on other OS-es"
we are going to discuss how Gabor is offending Dave?
I wrote a lengthy response pointing out various things but I think I'd
rather just apologize.
Dave,
I am sorry I did not mean to offend you. Keep up th
On Sat, Jul 02, 2011 at 10:24:33AM +0300, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 4:23 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
> > I went through a period of trying to make sure my code worked on
> > Windows, but I've given up. Not because it's hard to do - it generally
> > isn't - but the complete lack o
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 4:23 PM, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 03:11:08PM +0300, Gabor Szabo wrote:
>
>> So I'd like to ask you all to check the test reports of your modules and if
>> you
>> have consistent failures of one of your modules on Windows then try to fix
>> them.
>> I
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 03:11:08PM +0300, Gabor Szabo wrote:
> So I'd like to ask you all to check the test reports of your modules and if
> you
> have consistent failures of one of your modules on Windows then try to fix
> them.
> If you need any help, please send a message on either of those m
Hi,
some of you might know that Perl is quite underrepresented in the Windows
world. So although my main OS is Linux I thought giving a hand there might
be interesting. Therefore recently I started to run a CPAN smoker
http://www.cpantesters.org/ on a Windows XP machine running Strawberry
Perl 5.1
32 matches
Mail list logo
