On Sun, 9 Mar 2008 19:12:46 -0800, "Jonathan Leffler"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Good Evening (well, it was evening when I was writing this),
> 
> Having just released a new version of DBD::Informix, I've gotten a couple of
> bug reports from CPAN Testers about not being able to install it - which is
> no vast surprise since those people typically do not have the relevant
> software installed (which, in this case, means IBM Informix ESQL/C).
> However, some of them don't have DBI installed either, and that absence
> causes the Makefile.PL with DBD::Informix to fail.
> 
> Questions for you:
> 
>    1. Do you have a neat way of avoiding problems with DBI not being
>       available, or do you just ignore the reports from CPAN Testers?

I wonder how stupid that process is, in that they test modules for which
the prerequisite modules are not installed and then delete the post.

>    2. Is it me or is it silly that the CPAN Testers requirement for
>       'cannot install the module because the pre-requisites are missing'
>       is to exit with a 0 (success) status?

It's not only silly, but also very annoying. I won't complain though, as
the feedback I got for other modules was very helpful.

>       It grates horribly on my sense of what is appropriate to report
>       a failure as success.
>    3. Does anyone use ExtUtils::AutoInstall to assist?

Not me.

>       I've had it in DBD::Informix for a while (read several years)
>       but have just done the basic testing with a Perl without DBI
>       installed, and ExtUtils::AutoInstall doesn't seem to help
>       because I 'use DBI::DBD' and 'DBI' in various places.
> 
> I'm quite willing to look at your source code so if you have a mechanism in
> place and working -- just tell me which module to download.  Or you can
> explain in email with illustrations.
> 
> At the moment, to satisfy the CPAN Testers crowd, I think I'd have to have a
> dummy Makefile.PL that (a) arranged to install DBI and then (b) ran more or
> less the current Makefile.PL.  I'm sure that isn't kosher, but I'm not sure
> how else to do it, and I am therefore inclined to ignore the reports, but
> I'd really rather not waste their time, or my time, poking around looking at
> their bogus (but automatically generated) problem reports.
> 
> (Does anyone else get spam in [EMAIL PROTECTED] messages?  If so,
> do you just reject them or do you do anything more fanciful with them?)

None yet.

-- 
H.Merijn Brand         Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/)
using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.10.x  on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00, 11.11,
& 11.23, SuSE 10.1 & 10.2, AIX 5.2, and Cygwin.       http://qa.perl.org
http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/            http://www.test-smoke.org
                        http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

Reply via email to