Re: Last call for review of Test-Builder using Test2 (Formerly Test-Stream)

[Chad Granum]

*bump*

This thread has produced very little chatter. Bumping the thread again
after talking to rjbs. Next week he and I are going to talk about next
steps. (Please do not read that as we will talk next week and release, that
is not intended, implied, or expected).

-Chad

Re: Last call for review of Test-Builder using Test2 (Formerly Test-Stream)

[Chad Granum]

I am certainly not going to consider 24 hours of silence a reason to stamp
a stable label on it. Rjbs and I have a status meeting every week, if
things were completely silent for 2 weeks we were going to evaluate the
situation and move on from there.

In addition we still need people from the qa hackathon in berlin to confirm
or reject the assertion that their punch list items are satisfied before
the Test::Builder component can be marked stable. If they choose to be
silent on this thread we will reach out to them directly.

My point is, things are not going to happen over night, and silence will
not be taken as a seal of approval. That said, indefinite silence will also
not be considered a blocker past a point, but no time limits have been set
either way.

-Chad
On Feb 6, 2016 2:13 AM, "Kent Fredric"  wrote:

> On 6 February 2016 at 08:14, Chad Granum  wrote:
> > If there is anything in these
> > distributions (Test2 in particular) that makes you uncomfortable, you
> > need to speak now.
>
>
> Mentioning here for visibility:
>
> As with Test-Stream where the apparent silence lead to a premature
> conclusion that finalisation was appropriate, I feel interpreting the
> current lull in activity in the same way equally premature.
>
> I've seen a proposal floating around that might raise our ability to
> be confident about the feature set of Test2 before requiring its
> implementation/feature-freeze.
>
> Just the people who I talked to who implied they were going to present
> said proposal haven't yet had the tuits to do so yet.
>
>
> --
> Kent
>
> KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL
>

Re: Last call for review of Test-Builder using Test2 (Formerly Test-Stream)

[Kent Fredric]

On 6 February 2016 at 08:14, Chad Granum  wrote:
> If there is anything in these
> distributions (Test2 in particular) that makes you uncomfortable, you
> need to speak now.


Mentioning here for visibility:

As with Test-Stream where the apparent silence lead to a premature
conclusion that finalisation was appropriate, I feel interpreting the
current lull in activity in the same way equally premature.

I've seen a proposal floating around that might raise our ability to
be confident about the feature set of Test2 before requiring its
implementation/feature-freeze.

Just the people who I talked to who implied they were going to present
said proposal haven't yet had the tuits to do so yet.


-- 
Kent

KENTNL - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL