When i'm testing I'm mostly testing for syntactic/logic corectness, for which all that's required is creating ghost htmlcodes and the like (that part can usually be commented out).

Testing superdocs, like blakem's improved newest nodes lister (link to go here) is easier, since it's more self contained.

Most patches don't require a working copy of perlmonks to test ;), a working copy of everything will sufice, but even that's not entirely neccessary (fake a few global vars and you're in business).

A nodeball might not be a bad idea -- back in the day when we were trying to port perlmonks to the latest everything, there was a dump of the database going around, I still got that, but it's dated December 16, 2001. I don't know if it's a no-no to distribute it, or how usefull it would be.

I'm hoping if you wrote the snippet (shouldn't be hard, mysqldump database htmlcode container nodetype opcode superdoc;), the gods wouldn't mind dumping containers/nodetypes/opcodes/htmlcodes/superdocs, which is all you'd need to get a working clone going (minus settings as there seems to be some issues regarding revealing settings, not sure why). The rest is html fluf, and really isn't needed.


MJD says you can't just make shit up and expect the computer to know what you mean, retardo!
I run a Win32 PPM repository for perl 5.6x+5.8x. I take requests.
** The Third rule of perl club is a statement of fact: pod is sexy.


In reply to Re: Re: pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea) by PodMaster
in thread pmdev: patches to consider (feature idea) by crazyinsomniac

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":