Gabor Szabo wrote:
On 9/13/06, Thomas Klausner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In theory, we can now remove some of the very simple metrics (that
might not make that much sense), i.e. has_test_pod (no_pod_errors is
much better) and has_test_pod_coverage
The main reason why they're still here is because I do get reports from
people that say that adding these two test files (which they maybe never
heard of before (not everybody hangs around on YAPCs, IRC, use.perl and
perlmonks...)) made them add more/better docs. Which is good.
I would not remove them just reduce their weight in the overall rating.
They will remind people who don't know about them but will let others
achive high kwaletee rating even if they don't have them.
I concur.
I'd certainly like to see, at the very least, the pod coverage one
become an optional metric.
And I think Chris clarified my position pretty well. The problem with
encouraging a "good" is that it is almost always a specific "good"
behavior and creates a perfect environment for cargo-culting, exactly
the sort of fallout we've seen with the pod and pod_coverage tests.
That said, I've have come around a little on the subject of author tests.
The one advantage they do have, is that their inclusion means that while
I may check POD structure, a pod.t ensures that in the event of someone
else taking over the module, these things will continue to be checked.
But with that in mind, I still don't see much point in running them at
install-time, so lately I've modified my pod.t test so that it's skip
message is now "skipped: Author tests not required for installation" or
the like, and the tests now only run when AUTOMATED_TESTING is on.
So now the tests will still get run during CPAN Testers and the like,
but regular installation will not be impacted.
Adam K
