On Nov 4, 2005, at 5:55 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm working on something based on TAP, and I've come up
with some questions that Test::Harness::TAP doesn't
seem to address..
Take a look at whatever Test::Harness itself, or prove, does.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin Ivan,
On Sunday 06 November 2005 17:39, Ivan Tubert-Brohman wrote:
> Tels wrote:
> >>>* has_pod_index: The POD contains at least one X<> keyword that
> >>> helps POD indexers. Whether only one is usefull is open for debate,
> >>> because at least the licens
Tels wrote:
* has_pod_index: The POD contains at least one X<> keyword that helps
POD indexers. Whether only one is usefull is open for debate, because
at least the license (X), your CPAN ID under authors (x),
and some generic keyword what your module (X) is about can
probably added even for the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Sunday 06 November 2005 16:10, Ricardo SIGNES wrote:
> * Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-06T09:44:14]
>
> > * has_signature: a SIGNATURE file exists, and is a valid signatur.
>
> That seems reasonable, even though I dread signing all my dists. I
> fe
Shlomi Fish writes:
> On Wednesday 02 November 2005 08:23, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> > Given that the existing interface is pretty simple, I really don't
> > see why one has to completely fork the code base just to put on a
> > new interface. Surely any new code with a fancy new interface can
* Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-06T09:44:14]
> * has_signature: a SIGNATURE file exists, and is a valid signatur.
That seems reasonable, even though I dread signing all my dists. I feel
like it will be a big hassle, but maybe I'm just afraid of change.
> * has_pod_index: The POD contains at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
if these already have been proposed, please ignore me :)
I think the following kwalitiy checks should be added:
* has_signature: a SIGNATURE file exists, and is a valid signatur.
Technically, you should get -1 points if the signature file is
invalid/ga
