Re^4: Application Testing: Custom Module or Perl Test Files?

[geektron]

in reply to Re^3: Application Testing: Custom Module or Perl Test Files?
in thread Application Testing: Custom Module or Perl Test Files?

(N.B I'm the author of ExtUtils::ModuleMaker::TT, so, yes, I'm a fan of the ExtUtils::ModuleMaker school. And kudos to jkeenan1 for his recent updates!)

heheheh.

i've jumped on the testing team for ExtUtils::ModuleMaker, because i'd like to participate more, plus there are a few enhancements i'd like to see.

the only reason i made my comment was that even if it can be considered "overkill" to use ExtUtils::ModuleMaker just to start testing, having that skeleton there helps one *remember* what's needed.

[ghenry]

I'd like to see the addition of pod-coverage.t and pod.t like in Module::Starter

[xdg]

Why? To more easily jack up a CPANTS Kwalitee score? That's a flame/religious war just waiting to happen, with plenty of people on both sides. ExtUtils::ModuleMaker is not Module::Starter. If you really want what Module::Starter gives, then use Module::Starter.

[ghenry]

No, that's not what I want to happen.

I really like the idea of failing a module build because the docs aren't complete. This only comes from my role on the Fedora Documentation Steering Committee (FDSCo).

I'll leave the war for others, as I have only just encountered them both today, and don't know enough about either :)