Leader of Birmingham.pm [pm.org] and a CPAN author [cpan.org]. Co-organised YAPC::Europe in 2006 and the 2009 QA Hackathon, responsible for the YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org] and the QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org] websites. Also the current caretaker for the CPAN Testers websites and data stores.
If you really want to find out more, buy me a Guinness
Links:
Memoirs of a Roadie [missbarbell.co.uk]
[pm.org]
CPAN Testers Reports [cpantesters.org]
YAPC Conference Surveys [yapc-surveys.org]
QA Hackathon [qa-hackathon.org]
[More METADATA]
When reports are submitted, aside from the status, distribution and platform for the test, there are also the Perl and the Operating System versions included. Having submitted many Win32 reports over the last few months, it's not obvious that I'm testing on Windows 2000 Professional, with ActivePerl 5.6.1. Does this mean the same test on Windows 98 with ActivePerl 5.8.2 will have the same result? In most instances the answer is probably yes, but there are a number of key differences between the two OSs and Perls. The same is true of other OSs too. Aside from just checking the platform tests, it would be nice to firstly see the OS and Perl version appear more prominently on the distribution test pages (html/yaml) and database, and secondly for CPANPLUS to be a bit more thorough when verifying whether the distribution has been tested on the current setup (it currently just checks platform and the number of FAILs and UNKNOWNs).
[WITH WARNINGS]
One thing I have been doing manually for quite sometime, is submitting reports to the testers list and authors when distributions PASS but produce several warnings. So far I haven't received any negative feedback for doing this, but have had a couple of emails thanking me for highlight potential problems. I've always tried to fix warnings in my code (I was quite a dab-hand with lint when a C programmer), and would like others to let me know of warnings should they arise when testing my code. However, to do this with CPAN Testing would require quite a bit of change. I had a brief look at how it all works in CPANPLUS and it's quite complex. I haven't got it working yet, so still do it by hand, but hope to have something figured out eventually. Unless of course the CPANPLUS team think it's a good idea and implement it themselves.
Anyone with thoughts about this. Are they good ideas, worth doing, worth prompting Leon, Antrijus and the CPANPLUS team to take a look?
Metadata (Score:3, Insightful)
Reply to This
Re:Metadata (Score:2)
Warnings (Score:2)
Re:Warnings (Score:2)
Testing is great, but it only goes so far (Score:2)
I couldn't agree more with your comments. I've had a few test failures recently, but alas the test failure report doesn't tell me enough to have any idea why the module failed on their system, but passes all tests on mine!
After some digging I think I've figured out my most recent failure, the test report only told me pass on 5.6.x systems, and fail on 5.8 systems. It actually turned out to be an artifact caused by the change in hash ordering between 5.6.x and 5.8.x in the test suite. It's isn't anything t
-- "It's not magic, it's work..."