My hunch is that while Parrot's *version* number (found in top-level
file 'VERSION' and reported by Parrot::BuildUtils::parrot_version()) is
important for building Parrot, Parrot's repository *revision* numbers
are less important. But *how much* less important, I cannot yet say.
FWIW, here a
My hunch is that while Parrot's *version* number (found in top-level
file 'VERSION' and reported by Parrot::BuildUtils::parrot_version()) is
important for building Parrot, Parrot's repository *revision* numbers
are less important. But *how much* less important, I cannot yet say.
FWIW, here a
Allison Randal wrote:
To answer the questions for 03-revision.t:
Could you take a step back and explain what you're testing? At first
glance, I don't see why we would test the revision number. Just to be
sure that Parrot::Revision got some value during the configure process?
I. The testi
On Tue, 8 May 2007, James Keenan wrote:
> Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > The following oddity turned up today:
> >
> > t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING
> > # Failed test (t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING.t at line 51)
> > # '0'
> > # ne
> > # '0'
> > # Look
To answer the questions for 03-revision.t:
James Keenan wrote:
1. Can you say a bit more about the context in which you ran this
test? 'make test'? 'prove t/postconfigure/*.t'? In particular, did
you run it *before* running Configure.pl or *afterwards*?
I ran Configure.pl a while ago (w
On Tuesday 08 May 2007 17:39:14 James Keenan wrote:
> In my never-ending quest for complete code coverage, I had to devise
> a way to test both branches in that return statement, i.e., test
> under circumstances in which 'DEVELOPING' both does and -- here's the
> tricky part -- does not exis
Andy Dougherty wrote:
> The following oddity turned up today:
>
> t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING
> # Failed test (t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING.t at
line 51)
> # '0'
> # ne
> # '0'
> # Looks like you failed 1 test of 16.
> dubious
>Test ret
The following oddity turned up today:
t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING
# Failed test (t/postconfigure/02-revision_no_DEVELOPING.t at line 51)
# '0'
# ne
# '0'
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 16.
dubious
Test returned status 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
I rea
