Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
Testers, your thoughts? -- Forwarded message -- From: James E Keenan jk...@verizon.net Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 8:21 AM Subject: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0? To: David Golden xda...@gmail.com David, I've started getting reports of failures on two of my CPAN distros -- reports in which the testers say they are using Perl version '5.12.0'. Example: http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/6989462 Has 5.12.0 been released? (I haven't heard any announcements.) If this is a release candidate, shouldn't that show up in a tester's reports? Can you clarify? Thanks. jimk
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 08:36:49AM -0400, David Golden wrote: Testers, your thoughts? I know a few of us are indeed testing with perl-5.12.0-RC0 It doesn't appear to show up as that in the reports though. This bit: Characteristics of this binary (from libperl): Compile-time options: PERL_DONT_CREATE_GVSV PERL_MALLOC_WRAP USE_LARGE_FILES USE_PERLIO USE_PERL_ATOF Locally applied patches: RC0 Built under netbsd Compiled at Mar 22 2010 18:56:49 doesn't get included in the output at the bottom of the report. -- Forwarded message -- From: James E Keenan jk...@verizon.net Date: Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 8:21 AM Subject: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0? To: David Golden xda...@gmail.com David, I've started getting reports of failures on two of my CPAN distros -- reports in which the testers say they are using Perl version '5.12.0'. ??Example: ??http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/6989462 Has 5.12.0 been released? ??(I haven't heard any announcements.) If this is a release candidate, shouldn't that show up in a tester's reports? Can you clarify? ??Thanks. jimk !DSPAM:4bab5c3b305816474210989! -- Chris Williams aka BinGOs PGP ID 0x4658671F http://www.gumbynet.org.uk == pgpVoOvz4LrmP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 08:36:49AM -0400, David Golden wrote: I've started getting reports of failures on two of my CPAN distros -- reports in which the testers say they are using Perl version '5.12.0'. Example: http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/6989462 Has 5.12.0 been released? (I haven't heard any announcements.) If this is a release candidate, shouldn't that show up in a tester's reports? Testers, your thoughts? Yes, it should, as something like 5.12.0-rc0. I'm sure I remember that happening with 5.10.0 release candidates, but from looking at the database, it seems that my memory is faulty. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice [OS X] appeals to me as a monk, a user, a compiler-of-apps, a sometime coder, and an easily amused primate with a penchant for those that are pretty, colorful, and make nice noises. -- Dan Birchall, in The Monastery
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:15:04AM -0400, David Golden wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Chris 'BinGOs' Williams ch...@bingosnet.co.uk wrote: This bit: Characteristics of this binary (from libperl): Compile-time options: PERL_DONT_CREATE_GVSV PERL_MALLOC_WRAP USE_LARGE_FILES USE_PERLIO USE_PERL_ATOF Locally applied patches: RC0 Built under netbsd Compiled at Mar 22 2010 18:56:49 doesn't get included in the output at the bottom of the report. The output comes from Config::my_config, which is not the same as the output of 'perl -V'. I wonder if Config::Perl::V gives us those. I also wonder if we could quickly patch Test::Reporter to include the full -V output without breaking Barbie's or Andreas' report parsing. If it does, mine can be quickly patched to match it ;) Should an RC be classed as a patched version or an official release? I would think the former. Cheers, Barbie. -- Birmingham Perl Mongers http://birmingham.pm.org Memoirs Of A Roadie http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk CPAN Testers Blog http://blog.cpantesters.org YAPC Conference Surveys http://yapc-surveys.org
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Barbie bar...@missbarbell.co.uk wrote: If it does, mine can be quickly patched to match it ;) Should an RC be classed as a patched version or an official release? I would think the former. Patched, certainly. David
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
David Golden wrote: On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Barbie bar...@missbarbell.co.uk wrote: If it does, mine can be quickly patched to match it ;) Should an RC be classed as a patched version or an official release? I would think the former. Patched, certainly. David Yes, that was the impression I got from #p5p on IRC. They sorta expected it to be a quiet release and used just to test things. I blame BinGOs' bots for announcing it everywhere and making everyone excited :) However, I agree that having 5.12.0-RC0 masquerade as 5.12.0 is bad and confusing! ~Apocalypse
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:19 PM, p...@0ne.us p...@0ne.us wrote: Yes, that was the impression I got from #p5p on IRC. They sorta expected it to be a quiet release and used just to test things. I blame BinGOs' bots for announcing it everywhere and making everyone excited :) However, I agree that having 5.12.0-RC0 masquerade as 5.12.0 is bad and confusing! Where is BinGOs getting the perl version? -- David
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Barbie bar...@missbarbell.co.uk wrote: I'd prefer it not to be there too, but not sure where to put it instead. Will have think later, unless someone comes up with a better idea first CPAN::Testers::Common::Article parses for an extra stanza and that could be RCx -- but I don't know where it flows after that. And it's a nasty hack because it doesn't actually match the output of 'perl -V'. David
hacking Perl -V output for RC's
I've worked up a patch for Test::Reporter that would munge the myconfig line into this: Summary of my perl5 (revision 5 version 12 subversion 0 RC 0) configuration: It's fragile -- will break if there are other locally applied patches, but checks out on the 5.12.0-rc0 that I compiled. I'm reluctant to put it into a dev release of Test::Reporter, but maybe it's enough if people testing 5.12.0 release candidates use a special version of Test::Reporter. Thoughts? -- David
more thinking on getting RC status into reports
We could also add another X- header. X-Test-Reporter-Perl: 5.12.0 RC0 Assuming Barbie updates CPAN::Testers::Common::Article to prefer that over other things, we could at least keep the stats database clean. It doesn't help how reports are displayed, but maybe perl version can be added to template for displaying reports. -- David
Re: Fwd: CPAN Testers Using 5.12.0?
p...@0ne.us wrote: Yes, that was the impression I got from #p5p on IRC. They sorta expected it to be a quiet release and used just to test things. I blame BinGOs' bots for announcing it everywhere and making everyone excited :) Perl roadmap implies that a new development version is released every month around the 20th. So there's nothing secretive about it. I'm installing new smokers monthly (and drop old ones) without reading Perlbuzz or Perl Porters or something, I just know that there should be a new version. I believe Andreas and Chris do the same, knowing that they are interested in testing bleeding edge versions. -- Serguei Trouchelle
Re: more thinking on getting RC status into reports
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 02:55:20PM -0400, David Golden wrote: We could also add another X- header. X-Test-Reporter-Perl: 5.12.0 RC0 Assuming Barbie updates CPAN::Testers::Common::Article to prefer that over other things, we could at least keep the stats database clean. It doesn't help how reports are displayed, but maybe perl version can be added to template for displaying reports. I'm happy to go with either solution. Though the summary line version probably is the more correct solution, the X-header would be the easier to parse. Cheers, Barbie. -- Birmingham Perl Mongers http://birmingham.pm.org Memoirs Of A Roadie http://barbie.missbarbell.co.uk CPAN Testers Blog http://blog.cpantesters.org YAPC Conference Surveys http://yapc-surveys.org
Re: more thinking on getting RC status into reports
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Barbie bar...@missbarbell.co.uk wrote: I'm happy to go with either solution. Though the summary line version probably is the more correct solution, the X-header would be the easier to parse. OK. It turned out to be a lot more work than I originally anticipated, but I just released Test-Reporter-1.57: - includes full Perl -V output -- for human consumption - adds X-Test-Reporter-Perl header -- for easier parsing Here's the format: X-Test-Reporter-Perl: v5.12.0 RC0 I think in CPAN::Testers::Common::Article it's just a matter of saving it from the header into an attribute in new() and then having _extract_perl_version parse the saved value if it exists instead of searching the report body. The header will also be preserved through file save/load, but I have not yet done corresponding work on the CT2.0 Test::Reporter::Transport::Metabase. (I'm out of tuits for tonight) It's possible that all 5.12.0 reports on CT2.0 will need to be purged. I view this all as an awful stop-gap measure, but the value of smoking against 5.12.0 RC perls seems worth it. If anyone has problems with 1.57, please let me know ASAP. -- David
Fwd: CPAN Upload: D/DA/DAGOLDEN/Test-Reporter-Transport-Metabase-1.999003.tar.gz
Anyone beta testing with 5.12.0 RC0, please update to this version (and the latest Test::Reporter). Barbie -- since Metabase doesn't have mail headers, you will have to pick up the proper perl version using the right content field from the LegacyReport or TestSummary facts (or else duplicate the local patch parsing out of the body of the report). Thank you, David -- Forwarded message -- From: PAUSE upl...@pause.perl.org Date: Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:51 AM Subject: CPAN Upload: D/DA/DAGOLDEN/Test-Reporter-Transport-Metabase-1.999003.tar.gz To: David Golden xda...@gmail.com The uploaded file Test-Reporter-Transport-Metabase-1.999003.tar.gz has entered CPAN as file: $CPAN/authors/id/D/DA/DAGOLDEN/Test-Reporter-Transport-Metabase-1.999003.tar.gz size: 12820 bytes md5: e5d4687d85e74b1968ed6bcd15f1cc27 No action is required on your part Request entered by: DAGOLDEN (David Golden) Request entered on: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 04:50:40 GMT Request completed: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 04:51:05 GMT Thanks, -- paused, v1048
