Re^3: Interactivity in tests

in reply to Re^2: Interactivity in tests - done correctly?
in thread Interactivity in tests - done correctly?

I read the README and INSTALL files :-)

One of the things that can piss me off to no end is watching cli cpan hang because a) the config on that machine is missing a timeout b) you didn't code one

I would say code it, but provide a timeout, and let the thing install even if it's missing something.

Maybe at compile time it could break and tell why.
If your module becomes a dep for something else, maybe whomever is installing it will already be aware of what's up.

Comment on Re^3: Interactivity in tests - done correctly?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Interactivity in tests - done correctly? by tirwhan (Abbot) on Jan 22, 2009 at 20:37 UTC
I would say code it, but provide a timeout, and let the thing install even if it's missing something. Oh, absolutely, I think I didn't explain that very well. I don't intend to prompt all users for the information, just want to tell them that an additional test is available and then have them run that test (with prompts) manually if they want. That will mean less people actually run it, but that's better than annoying everybody who attempts to install the module :-). All dogma is stupid.	[reply] [d/l]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Interactivity in tests - done correctly?
by tirwhan (Abbot) on Jan 22, 2009 at 20:37 UTC

I would say code it, but provide a timeout, and let the thing install even if it's missing something.

Oh, absolutely, I think I didn't explain that very well. I don't intend to prompt all users for the information, just want to tell them that an additional test is available and then have them run that test (with prompts) manually if they want. That will mean less people actually run it, but that's better than annoying everybody who attempts to install the module :-).

All dogma is stupid.

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom