David Golden <x...@xdg.me> writes: > On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 8:28 PM, Shmuel Fomberg <shmuelfomb...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> I disagree. A failure to install is a bug. > > I respect your position
I also understand Shmuel's position, ... > , but this has been debated ad nauseum over the years. The general > consensus is that CPAN Testers exists to see if distributions *build* > and *test* correctly. ... and I also agree with that. However, to me it's not clear whether Shmuel had actually new solutions in mind. So just for the archives, one *could* for instance simply render the "Chance of all tests passing" from http://deps.cpantesters.org into the metacpan overview page. Then again it's not clear whether that information is worth to be that prominent because all arguments on http://deps.cpantesters.org/static/overall-chance.html apply. And obviously "someone with tuits"(TM) aka. "someone else"(R) has to actually do that. Maybe a task for a metacpan contributor... Kind regards, Steffen -- Steffen Schwigon <s...@renormalist.net> Perl benchmarks <http://perlformance.net> Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/>
