- We still don't have Test::More in the 5.6.1 core (it was added in 5.6.2/5.8.0), so we can't rely on it being available.
sure, but you can conditionally skip over those tests for users that don't have Test::More installed. I know that currently doing that is kind of ugly, but we could come up with some pretty shortcuts for this if you like.
Am I correct to say that Test::More is in the core for all but 5.6.1 the required minimum by mp2? so if we make a dependency on Test::More only the 5.6.1 users will have to figure out how to get this module before they can start building modperl? If we agree to go with the switch to T::M, do we have sufficient functionality with T::M shipped with 5.8.0 for example? i.e. is 5.6.1 the only perl version that we need to require users to do an extra operation or do we require a specific T::M version, in which case many other distros are affected?
- Test::More's verbose output doesn't work the way we want, it prints out the expected/received values only on failure, making it really hard to develop tests.
that's a matter of personal preference - I very much prefer the behavior of is() to t_cmp() :)
I understand that Test::More's behavior is preferrably at run time, since it prints out the data only when there are problems. But how do you develop a new test if you have no way to force Test::More to print the compared values? That's the only reason why I prefer t_cmp() to is().
anyway, I understand your concerns, so go ahead and implement it if you like. it just feels really, really bad to continue moving as though the Perl community hasn't already solved these problems with what is considered to be the standard testing module.
At the moment I'm fine.
-- __________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
