Im sort of looking for the opposite of that list, which would include hypothetical's
Dean On 2014-08-26 14:13, Gabor Szabo wrote: > If I am not mistaken you are looking for the data I referred to yesterday > http://stats.cpantesters.org/mplatforms.html [1] > when I was looking for a graph to see the trends in number of reports / OS > (or rather platform). > Sinan linked to a script extracting the data from the HTML, but I have not > had time to create a graph from it yet. > > Gabor > > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Dean Hamstead <d...@fragfest.com.au> wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> I was looking to fire up some cpan smokers, but adding yet another linux >> i386/amd64 smoker probably isnt needed. In the past i have run DragonflyBSD >> and OpenBSD smokers. >> >> Looking through the list it's clear that there is a lot of coverage across a >> lot of different platforms, but its not clear which ones are deficient etc. >> >> On top of os+arch, there are also obviously a range of different ways you >> can compile perl - made far easier with perlbrew - which also need testing. >> >> Hence I wonder if there is something a matrix that shows deficiencies in >> testing coverage, which will give people like myself a quick list of >> platforms we could fire up in a VM (or old hardware we could >> beg/borrow/steal/ebay) >> >> I guess in an ideal world, list out every known supported OS and hardware, >> then multiply that out by all the different perl compilation variations. >> From that list it could then be determined which platforms are keeping up >> with the testing and which are lagging behind. That list could then give the >> curious and willing something to work with? >> >> Dean Links: ------ [1] http://stats.cpantesters.org/mplatforms.html
