Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2012
On 02/29/2012 11:57 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote: > The thing that *would* have got it is a "build all of CPAN", which we don't > have the resources to do for every change. So it gets down to - how do we > spot which changes need that sort of thing? It's not just that. While I did expend the effort to write tools for CPAN smoking (hacky, yeah, I'll admit that) which have step-by-step instructions, and are all set up on a machine that all committers have access to, I'm still the only one who's ever volunteered to use it to do CPAN smokes. I suppose I could fill the gap between "run the following couple of commands, wait, look at HTML report" to get "click on the following button on a web page, wait, look at HTML report". But I doubt THAT level of automation is going to help very much. :( > I think the key thing that was missing here was realising that this change > broke the CPAN smokers *reporting* setup. Which would have cut off reports, > and hence hidden the problems. > > Regular automated smoke testing to be sure that the reporting setup isn't > broken seems like the first thing to fix. Unlike "all of CPAN", doing that > on a fast cycle seems tractable. Yes, but requires a fair amount of effort to set up and maintain. That's not free, particularly, since it'll be one of the people doing it that are otherwise spending their time on *different* useful stuff --SteffenThread Previous | Thread Next