On Jan 8, 2008 4:51 AM, Barbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thinking a little about this, I think that a skipfile and exclude_dists > are two very different things. While they can both use the same format, > their function has a different aim.
That is why I decided to have two of them. > skipfile should contain authors/distribution where authors have > requested no report to be sent to them. The exclude_dists is then a > local setting by the tester that designates whether a distribution is > tested or not. Correct. > I think your intention of send_skipfile above is the same as > exclude_dists, but it should be decided by the local tester not the > author. That's a a political choice. There are some authors who have complained that their distribution is old or for some specialized hardware/software configuration and just shouldn't be tested. It doesn't really matter to me -- I just want to be able to fix things once and let everyone benefit. > I'll amend exclude_dists in YACSmoke and look to adding the skipfile > setting. As a side note about YACSmoke config -- given that you already have "exclude_dists" as a funky HERE document of lines (which is not "standard" INI format, I think), I would suggest adding an "exclude_dists_file" option to let that file be maintained separately if people wish. Then our approaches will be harmonized. On the issue of excluding entirely authors -- that seemed the easier way of not CC'ing someone rather than going distribution by distribution. But rather than having to maintain "dists" and "authors" separately, I realized that the CPAN::Dist->pretty_id has both: DAGOLDEN/CPAN-Reporter-1.0602.tar.gz -- that makes it easy for one regex to hit either one. What's your timeline on releasing YACSmoke changes? I was getting near to whipping up a quick CPAN::Reporter::Smoker myself for my own use and I'll hold off if the rest of the framework is there (though it might be more heavyweight than I was considering). Is it in a repo somewhere? David
