On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:50:19 +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: > I'm not sure if it's better to leave the POD tests disabled, ie. remove > the IS_MAINTAINER setting from debian/rules, or fix the tests.
Or fix the module :)
> The
> IS_MAINTAINER=0 approach is a bit cleaner, but then the hypothetical
> Debian user wanting to modify Params::Validate and check the documentation
> of his new code is going to hit this issue instead of us...
Agreed, disabling tests is not very elegant IMO.
> An easy way to fix the tests is to add all the naked subroutines to
> the 'trustme' list in t/pod-coverage.t, which is presumably what the
> maintainer will do if they ever have to upgrade Pod::Coverage.
I'm not so sure this is enough; after changing the relevant line to
all_pod_coverage_ok( { trustme => [
qr/validation_options|validate_pos|validate|validate_with|set_options|UNKNOWN/
] } );
in t/pod-coverage.t the tests pass but I still get
t/pod-coverage...........Prototype mismatch: sub Params::Validate::validate
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) vs none at
/tmp/buildd/libparams-validate-perl-0.89/blib/lib/Params/ValidateXS.pm line 131.
Prototype mismatch: sub Params::Validate::validate_pos (\@@) vs none at
/tmp/buildd/libparams-validate-perl-0.89/blib/lib/Params/ValidateXS.pm line 132.
ok
which doesn't look right.
> I see build-conflicting with libtest-coverage-perl as the worst option,
> but even that would be better than the current situation leading to
> unexpected build failures.
Ack.
Hm, sorry, I'm not sure what's the best way to go either ...
Cheers,
gregor
--
.''`. http://info.comodo.priv.at/ | gpg key ID: 0x00F3CFE4
: :' : debian: the universal operating system - http://www.debian.org/
`. `' member of https://www.vibe.at/ | how to reply: http://got.to/quote/
`- NP: Andrew Lloyd Webber & Tim Rice
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
