On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 01:35:57PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: > In that, this has all become massively distracting from what were real issues > being raised - what is the purpose of aggressively testing for something that > isn't being actively resolved? I saw the purpose as testing that new POD issues weren't being introduced. > Which does need to be resolved. The status quo of "just adding to the > exception list" is not good. And I think that everyone will agree on *that* > aspect of things. Just adding to the exception list is similar to making a change that breaks perl and then changing the tests that broke into TODO tests. TonyThread Previous | Thread Next