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.
  • There are currently around 60 regular CPAN Testers, who test on a variety of platforms and perls. Last month there were 22 different platforms and 11 different perls giving 241 different setups. Being able to have perhaps a good selection of images, with at least the major perl releases and the most popular platforms is a good idea. And the idea you're proposing would hopefully catch most of the obvious bugs, but you aren't going to get away from using CPAN testers. I am pretty certain every single one of t
    • CPAN Testers doesn't solve the problem of testing. Full stop.

      They solve ONLY the limited subset "testing released CPAN packages".

      CPAN Testers is no solution at all for company or private packages.

      And of course they test only what they want. If they didn't want to be in CPAN testers, they wouldn't be there.

      They have full control over what they do, and I have ZERO control over them, as you would expect from people contributing their time in this way.

      I'm just starting to get a little frustrated that every
      • CPAN Testers doesn't solve the problem of testing. Full stop.

        No it does solve complete coverage of testing, but it goes a long way to covering the bulk of scenarios. Trying to test every scenario that exists is a huge task and one I don't think will ever be achieved.

        CPAN Testers is no solution at all for company or private packages.

        Why? I assume you're talking from your own experience. In my experience the cpan-testers have proved useful to know what works on various platforms out of the box and what may need a little work to get it going.

        And of course they test only what they want. If they didn't want to be in CPAN testers, they wouldn't be there.

        To a degree that's true, but I think you're being very stereotypical, and there are plenty of testers who do their utmost to test as much as they can.

        I have to rewrite to replace half of what I encounter because a lot of it is written for far too specific scenarios.

        I'm curious as to why you appear to be berating the current approach, yet mosts of the task are built on top of each other. CPAN/CPANPLUS are installers, yet they work with the CPAN Testing tools. The CPAN Testing tools could probably be used in the kind of settings you require. Building the components makes more sense as they can then be used better in more than the intended scenario.

        I think your last statement is misplaced. Although you may feel that people are trolling and not helping to get the job done, for myself I am interested in your idea, unfortunately I don't have the time to work on it right now. Others may be in a similar position. From what you've said I would say others are trying to offer encouragement and support where they can. It might not seem enough, but personally I would rather that, than they try and knock me down at every opportunity.