All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
use Perl Log In
LTjake (4001)
5 more down
Catalyst 5.7014 is out the door. Hopefully that will stop the flood of questions about a "strange uri_for() behavior." With that done, I've taken out 5 more RT tickets.
Two extremely old wishlist items were rejected (RT #26758, RT #24132). This is basically due to the fact that they were over a year old, and really should be talked about on the dev list if they are still inclined to have them resolved.
A couple others required that I cook up a test or two to ensure the patch was applying was satisfactory (naturally, we would always hope to have a test submitted along side the patch): RT #26455, RT #34437.
The last ticket seems to have been related to a regression in 5.7013, as the ticket author claims the latest release fixed the issue. Closed! (RT #35994)
exercise for the reader. :-) --Larry Wall in <7448@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
RT vs. maillist (Score:1)
Why don't you just set RT to forward reports to the mailing list and save us both a lot of time?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I'm sensing some frustration in your post. Let me see if I can give you some perspective from where I'm coming from.
For the large part RT has been ignored by the Catalyst developers. The reasons are two fold:
1) Only a select number of people have access to the RT queue.
2) The currency for development discussion has been the mailing list(s).
The majority of bug reports and feature requests up to this point have been handled on the catalyst and catalyst-dev mailing lists. As a Catalyst "core" members,
Re: (Score:1)
As maintainer (or co-maintainer) of many packages, I'm aware of how much time it takes to field bug reports and feature requests. That time is why I can't afford join the mail list of every project to which I contribute bugs (179 rt.cpan.org tickets over 6 years, with 6 rejections).
With Perl::Critic, we usually add feature requests