On 12/03/07, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Fergal Daly wrote:
> Remember, the TAP producer is not the instigator of the conversation.
> The consumer is - it runs the scripts, it requests something to
> produce TAP. The consumer is the the client.
Oh but that's not necessarily true. As pointed out there are plenty of
situations where A) the TAP producer has no idea who its producing for and
B) the resulting TAP can be read by several different parsers and C) there
may be a long gap between producing and parsing.
* Writing out to a file for later examination
* Writing out to a log file (the Test::AtRuntime concept)
* Sending via an email
Consider the case where you have a nightly smoke server. The smoker server
dumps the TAP to a log file and archives it for later examination as part of
the history of the product. Or maybe the results go out to a mailing list.
It is, after all, the Test Anything Protocol.
That's fine and if it produces TAP that the consumer can't read then
whoever set up this situation has work todo. I'm just trying to help
the situation where joe user is trying to get a module installed and
finds he has to update his Test::Harness when maybe he doesn't want
to.
I have no problem telling people you must keep your Test::Harness up
to date with your Test::Builder. I'm just quite surprised that so many
people are so vehemently _for_ forcing people to do this,
F
