develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from June 2013

Re: I made t/podcheck.t less sensitive and fixed various pod issues

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Tony Cook
June 12, 2013 07:46
Re: I made t/podcheck.t less sensitive and fixed various pod issues
Message ID:
On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 12:26:13PM -0400, David Golden wrote:
> > Yes, you have stated this position before. Do you also have something
> > to say to Karl’s detailed objections, now that he has addressed several
> > of these aforestated points (on *merit*, which you kept demanding) and
> > shown some of your claims to be false, or at the very least debatable?
> I didn't find anything that changes the fundamental difference of
> opinion we seem to have about pod lint tests.
> Karl claims that these tests are the equivalent of TODO and should be
> kept for that reason.  They are not.  TODO tests warn but do not fail.
>  These tests fail.  (Even *fixing* a known issue causes a fail.)

The existing entries in t/porting/known_pod_issues.dat act as TODO

You'll only see failures if:

a) you happen to fix an issue - great, you've fixed a TODO, regenerate
the file to un-TODO it.  This is similar to the way normal TODO tests,
they don't fail the build, but they do appear in the test summary.

b) you happen to introduce a new issue - either fix the issue
(preferred), or regenerate the file to add a new TODO.


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About