On 17/06/2005 09:14 Michael G Schwern wrote:
This is all a bit of a ramble. Could we have an executive summary as to
the point particularly in relation to MakeMaker, CPANPLUS and module authors
in general?
CPANPLUS issues FAIL reports when there is no C compiler, which irks
module authors who feel such reports make their module look bad.
Some feel that CPANPLUS should detect this and not send a report, others
feel it should send a report, but with a different grade: NA or some new
grade such as UNGRADED, since there are advantages to testing what a
Build will do if there is no C compiler.
Another idea is to ExtUtils::MakeMaker or Module::Build to refuse to try
and build a module if a C compiler is required (and update CPANPLUS to
detect this). This seems connected to the larger issue of NA reports
when libraries or applications are missing.
I'm of the opinion that people who pay attention to test reports when
deciding whether to use a module should be saavy enough to interpret
them, but I'm probably wrong. Maybe a FAQ is needed for the testers web
site that explains how to do this?
My own take is that these fails should be sent out anyway, but as NA
reports. Too many grade types can get confusing, but it should be
feasible to analyze failure reports automatically to classify them:
* Perl version too low
* Unsupported operating system
* Missing required libraries or applications
* Missing compiler, linker or other utility needed for build
* Other error during build
In other words, the meaning of NA should be it wasn't able to
successfully build the software and get to the testing phase.
Rob
