Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I like that people test my modules on any version of Perl, but I'd like to see the Testers figure out how to have two sets of results: stable version results and everything else. The stable results are for the public. The everything else gets sent to developers and isn't in the testers database.

    I'd like to see things such as CPAN Search just use the stable results. That might be as easy as slicing the data for public consumption without making any changes to the people doing the testing.

    • That's why the CPAN Testers Matrix (e.g. the PDF::API2 results [radzeit.de]) exists. You can easily see if failures are OS or perl dependent and feel free to ignore it.
      • The CPAN Testers matrix isn't something see on CPAN Search though, which is the point. This isn't the normal techie problem of thinking that the data is there and if people would just look at it everything would be fine. People see the summary of PASS and FAIL on a module page first, and then maybe (maybe) the matrix.

        I want that first impression to be better tuned to what their experience will be, which is using the module with a stable version of Perl.

        • If you're refering to the number of PASSes and FAILs on the summary page --- these numbers are nearly meaningless, just like the cpanrating stars or the number of open RT tickets.
          • Those numbers are quite meaningful to large set of people unable to reliable judge the code themselves. They use results like 100% PASS as a guide of it they can trust the code to work in some random place.

            • People really choose a CPAN distribution based on a single number?
              • Pretend you're not an expert Perl contributor for ten minutes. Imagine that someone told you to find an XML module for Perl from the CPAN. You shuffle through several dozen pages of search results and read the distribution pages. Some of them have a big red "CPAN TESTERS SAYS THIS CODE GETS A FAIL!!!" notice.

                How many non-experts are going to dig into matrices of platform combinations and bleadperl patchlevels to realize that, oh, you can't rearrange the struct members between a PV and a PVMG and retain source code XS compatibility, but that's okay, because someone on p5p just proposed a patch to fix things?

                I don't normally guess at hypothetical situations like that, but in this case, I don't have to guess. The number is zero.

                I suppose an alternate approach is to educate some 6.2 billion potential CPAN users that there's little useful meaning in the numbers posted on the CPAN distribution pages, but that seems like more work than removing meaningless data and publishing only meaningful data.