Testers Statistics site,
> which was finally made available (but very silently) by Barbie:
> http://perl.grango.org/
I wouldn't say silently, as I did announce it in my use.perl journal.
However, I wasn't convinced that many people would be interested in it,
so I didn't make a
ich mechanisms for
testing and reporting are getting it wrong, if the automated apps tag
the report.
Barbie.
l see if he'll let me host it on the Birmingham.pm server for
you all to have a play with.
Barbie.
myself. If we going to improve
reporting it would help to have a wider discussion group. Whenever
Robert or I have posted here, it hasn't really reach the right audience.
I'm glad that the AUTOMATED_TESTING flag is getting picked up now, but
it would be nice to throw those ideas around more often, and getting
them refined quicker.
I'm looking forward to evaluating PITA, but it will likely have to be on
a Perl 5.8.7 Windows box, as my 5.6.1 box can't install any of the PITA
distributions on CPAN at the moment, due to the dependency issue ;)
Cheers,
Barbie.
ms more appropriate to discuss these elsewhere than
on a QA list. I'll investigate setting something up on the Birmingham.pm
server, unless there is somewhere else that would be more appropriate.
Cheers,
Barbie.
CSmoke I can start taking a look and see what needs to be done
> > to implement it.
I will look into this further, but it'll be lower on my todo list, as it
will be driven by packagers rather than testers.
Barbie.
own compatible OSs, and if it doesn't find it, bail
out with a "OS unsupported" message. See this slide [1] for a simple
example.
[1] http://birmingham.pm.org/talks/barbie/cpan-ready/slide603.html
This has been in CPANPLUS for a while now. While the obvious
distributions of Win32:: and L
ld that due to
legacy systems, test scripts using Test.pm must always pass, even if
there are failures. There are still a few distributions that are
submitted to CPAN like this.
Barbie.
> From: Adam Kennedy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Barbie wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 19, 2006 at 10:22:20PM +1100, Adam Kennedy wrote:
> >> 2. Incompatible packaging.
> >> Packaging unwraps, but missing files for the testing scheme.
> >
> > You may w
n easy way for an author to define prerequisites for doing an
> exhaustive smoke test of their distribution.
I think it would be possible for CPANPLUS to be patched to add these to
the list of prerequisites if in AUTOMATED_TESTING mode, so it should be
possible. I think PITA should be able to do something similar.
Barbie
ere an announced reason for this I missed or is something down?
Unfortunately Leon has been having problems with his server [1], which is where
the parsing of all the reports is done and the master testers.db resides. Until
it's back online there won't be any updates.
[1] http://use.perl
ed was when one of the 3 stages
failed, and the top level namespace matched a platform name that wasn't the
current platform. This was why a while ago there were some NA reports for
distributions in the 'MAC::' namespace. There was a case insensitive test that
thought it was in the 'Mac::' namespace.
Hope that clarifies a few points.
Cheers,
Barbie.
--
Barbie (@missbarbell.co.uk) | Birmingham Perl Mongers user group |
http://birmingham.pm.org/
---
This mail sent through http://www.easynetdial.co.uk
of POD headers too, but this is
a purely personal thing. Every author has their own interpretation of what
headings they should include. That's something else that could be considered a
kwalitee item, but shouldn't be.
Anything that productively improves the kwalitee of CPAN and the di
0.13/Makefile.PL
[2] http://search.cpan.org/dist/XML-LibXML-Common/
Barbie
You have a sick sense of humour young man ;)
Barbie.
--
Barbie (@missbarbell.co.uk) | Birmingham Perl Mongers user group |
http://birmingham.pm.org/
s I tested recently with only
test.pl, and can't. Will have to keep and eye out for them and see whether
they do use Test::More. There are still quite a few just using test.pl, but
I think they are mostly, if not all, originally written when only Test.pm
was around.
Barbie.
--
barbie (@mi
t; >
> > He uses test.pl. Sic 'em.
>
> That sort of cleanup is exactly what Phalanx is about. I think
> Parse::RecDescent is on the Phalanx 100.
I was going to say that this sounds like a job for Andy's Phalanx team :)
Barbie.
ort maybe unavailable, due to the fact that no-one has got around to testing
it, a simple search mechanism (platform/perl version) using your script could generate
the current info from the testers.db file.
I like the idea, and with the CPANTS work that Thomas is doing this could be very nice.
Barbie.
more free time ;-)
>>
>
> User Mode Linux (limiting to Linux, of course) might be a lighter
> weight way to do this.
Would this cope with Win32, MacOS or other OS specific modules?
Barbie.
LocalGroupGetMembers() and Win32::NetAdmin::GroupGetMembers()
functions if you wanted a separate Win32 test script, otherwise as soon as you start
calling Unixy admin programs your distribution will likely get labelled (wrongly)
under CPAN testing as 'NA' on other OSs.
Barbie.
--
Bar
20 matches
Mail list logo
