Hi Chris!
These reports:
* http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/10/msg2472650.html
* http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.cpan.testers/2008/10/msg2473253.html
Have tested File-Find-Object without installing its Class::Accessor
pre-requisite:
# at t/01ffo.t line 9.
#
--- On Thu, 23/10/08, Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have tested File-Find-Object without installing its
Class::Accessor
pre-requisite:
Here is a list of prerequisites you specified and versions
we
managed to load:
Module Name
On Oct 23, 2008, at 12:37 PM, chromatic wrote:
I don't care about backchannel communication between other authors
and CPAN
Testers, but how can you blame Shlomi for thinking that public
humiliation
isn't a vital component of Kwalitee? There's prior art:
On Thu, October 23, 2008 10:37 am, chromatic wrote:
I don't care about backchannel communication between other authors and
CPAN
Testers, but how can you blame Shlomi for thinking that public humiliation
isn't a vital component of Kwalitee? There's prior art:
On Thursday 23 October 2008 06:34:41 Ovid wrote:
That being said, why are you trying to publicly humiliate people by sending
this information to Perl-QA? I've contacted Perl-QA to try and find a smoke
author before, but not to name and shame. That just seems rude.
I don't care about
On Oct 23, 2008, at 1:25 PM, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
http://cpants.perl.org/highscores/hall_of_shame
That looks sorted by kwalitee and author. If we're shaming people,
author
name shouldn't be a factor. Could it be by kwalitee and most recent
release
date instead?
How about
On Thursday 23 October 2008 11:25:05 Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Thu, October 23, 2008 10:37 am, chromatic wrote:
I don't care about backchannel communication between other authors and
CPAN Testers, but how can you blame Shlomi for thinking that public
humiliation isn't a vital
http://cpants.perl.org/highscores/hall_of_shame
It says Not Found
thanks domm
Gabor
Shlomi,
Given what was said here and my own past statements on wanting to improve
civility, I apologize to you (and publicly!) because regardless of my opinion
of your email, I should not have copied the Perl-QA list on that. It was very
disrespectful of me.
Sincerely,
Ovid
--
Buy the book
http://test-more.googlecode.com/files/Test-Simple-0.85_01.tar.gz
This latest release resolves a number of long outstanding issues in cmp_ok().
The biggest being this:
cmp_ok $object, '==', $number;
cmp_ok() would always stringify or numify its arguments, removing the
overloading. This
10 matches
Mail list logo