Re: Re: Speaking about debian-perl to conferences
.... and to add another note here
Maybe there should be a Kwalitee metric on CPANTS that says
or maybe just "easily_repackagable_for_debian".
You people could collect a set of checks that can be made
automatically on a module
and I am quite sure Thomas (CC-ing him) will be happy to add this metric to
CPANTS during the QA Hackathon in Oslo.
Then - when packaging a module with some issues, you could send a
polite letter to
the module author pointing her to this metric and asking to fix the module.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Gabor Szabo <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Jeremiah C. Foster
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:48:44 +0100, Jeremiah C. Foster wrote:
> > > you could mention the need for sane version numbers :)
> > heh. What exactly do you mean though? Do you mean that some CPAN modules have version
> > numbers in the form of 1.2.3 and some have the form of 1.0? I think the fact that
> > they vary so widely is not so sane. A selection:
> > (0.2200-3) libdbd-csv-perl
> > (0.16001-1) libdatetime-format-pg-perl
> > (0.99.4-4) libio-prompt-perl
> > (0.2808.01-1) libmodule-build-perl
> > (0.06.1b-5) libpdf-create-perl
> > Do you think that perhaps the PAUSE server might have a gentle advisory that a version number
> > in the form of major.minor (i.e. 1.0) might be useful for those downstream as well as useful
> > for users to estimate the relative maturity of the code? Or is this one of those things that
> > would be great if we could do it but we can never get everyone to do it?
> after seeing this message I asked on the module-authors list what
> people think about enforcing
> a stricter format of version numbering on some level. We'll have to
> see what is going to be the
> responses - if any.
> I checked the specific modules mentioned:
> > (0.2200-3) libdbd-csv-perl Is actually 0.22 on CPAN, where is the additional 00 from?
> > (0.16001-1) libdatetime-format-pg-perl 0.16001
> > (0.99.4-4) libio-prompt-perl v0.99.4
> > (0.2808.01-1) libmodule-build-perl 0.2808
> Where was the additional 01 taken
> from ? Was that the 0.2808_01 release?
> > (0.06.1b-5) libpdf-create-perl Currently 0.08 on CPAN
> In any case there is already a CPANTS kwalitee metric for proper version number
> http://cpants.perl.org/kwalitee.html but all the mentioned modules
> passed the test.
> So maybe the has_proper_version on CPANTS should be stricter.
Perl Training in Israel http://www.pti.co.il/