On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 8:24 PM, Andreas J. Koenig < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > I assume there is a much more elegant and established way to do this for > > locally managed (private) distributions. > > It depends what you want to achieve. Sending an email is more trivial > but can be annoying when the test failure comes and goes. Then you'd > rather like to see the history of each project instead and only get an > email if a problem persists for more than a day or so. I think "smolder" > might be what you want but I haven't tried it myself. > Thanks for the tips. This is moving beyond a MakeMaker question so I'll dig around elsewhere. What I want to achieve is a more mature and scalable testing framework for our internal code. There's a number of goals. One is to have testing in place so developers get notified if they check in code that results in a failed test. I have a custom tool for that now, but I would like to use a more standard approach. Adding smolder to that process would be very useful, although the real need is to make sure developers check in passing code so it doesn't have to get fixed at a later time after the developer has moved onto another project. The other goal is to allow non-developers (e.g. IT staff) to be able to build OS distribution packages (e.g. RPM or .deb), which means making sure dependencies can be determined (from Makefile.PL) and that tests can be run. Luckily, there seems to be common tools for turning Perl modules into OS-dependent packages. The tricky part is getting everyone on board building standard distributions with complete dependencies and tests. -- Bill Moseley [email protected]
