Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option

by jk2addict (Chaplain)
on May 18, 2005 at 18:17 UTC ( #458365=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option

A while back I started a crapstorm on the qa list about maintaining META.yml which led to a Module::Build vs. ExtUtils::MakeMaker debate and a rant by Schwern.

For me at least, M::B just has better support for maintaining the various information in META.yml moreso than in E::MM. My beef with using the 'traditional' option is that it puts optional modules into the Makefile PREREQ_PM making them build requirements (as apposed to just requirement for test running).

Which leads to the whole debate of if a passing 'make test' is a requirement of a 'successful build', then why aren't the tests just run at the end of 'make' or 'Build'.

But I digress...


Comment on Re: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option
Re^2: Module::Build users -- please use the "traditional" create_makefile_pl option
by perrin (Chancellor) on May 18, 2005 at 18:27 UTC
    I don't run the tests when I'm installing known modules in an automated build. I definitely don't want them to be mandatory.

    It sounds like the traditional option should just be changed to leave out the optional modules.

    Incidentally, META.yml is also pretty annoying, because YAML is so fragile and seems to exist for the sole purpose of thumbing its nose at XML, but that's not a serious problem for me.

      I don't run the tests when I'm installing known modules in an automated build. I definitely don't want them to be mandatory.

      This is a loaded question; and doesn't mean I don't do the exact same thing. :-) If you skip the tests, how do you know the install will work as intended?

        I have tests for my application. If those pass, I don't care if the individual module tests pass. I'm installing modules that I know on an OS that I have used them on before, so I don't consider it risky.

        But there's another issue too -- some modules have tests that are not meant to be run when installing. These are tests that the developer wrote for development use and that will not work on other machines. So, the assumption that tests should be run on install is not shared by all module authors.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://458365]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (4)
As of 2014-08-23 21:24 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The best computer themed movie is:











    Results (178 votes), past polls