develooper Front page | perl.qa | Postings from March 2005

Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META

From:
Randy W. Sims
Date:
March 30, 2005 03:12
Subject:
Re: [Module::Build] Re: Test::META
Message ID:
424A89A5.6030102@thepierianspring.org
Clayton, Nik wrote:
>>On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 08:33:48PM -0500, Randy W. Sims wrote:
>>
>>>A quickie sample implementation to add more meat. I didn't apply yet 
>>>mainly because I'm wondering if we shouldn't bail and do a complete 
>>>roll-back (eg. don't generate a Build script) if there are any failed 
>>>requirements. Or should we bail, for example, during ./Build test if 
>>>there are any test_requires failures? Or continue as is and just let it 
>>>fail when it tries to use the missing requirements?
>>
>>Continue.  Nothing's more frustrating than a system which refuses to even
>>try to go forward when some checklist is incomplete.
> 
> 
> Fail.  Nothing's more frustrating than a system which fails with a strange
> error, when the real problem is listed somewhere in the scrollback buffer.

Both. We could fail by default, but allow an option to force it to 
ignore missing or conflicting dependencies:

$ perl Build test
Aborting: Missing required module(s) for testing:
   Test::Foo
   Test::Bar

$ perl Build test --force
Ignoring: Missing required module(s) for testing:
   Test::Foo
   Test::Bar
...

Just another option.



nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About