On 2015-10-15 05:42:05, MANWAR wrote:
Show quoted text> Hi Slaven,
>
> I noticed that when Michal raised the issue first. I am embarrassed to
> be honest by this.
> I have now added Gisbert as well in this conversation as he also has
> stake into this project.
>
> I have made error message consistent throughout as requested by Michal
> earlier but that might break some/all tests for you guys. Please
> accept my apology in advance.
>
> This made me thinking how best to deal with such kind of changes
> without affecting so much users. I am open to any suggestions. I have
> one suggestion though that I would like to put forward and happy to
> receive your comment on the same.
>
> "Collect all unit tests from every Map::Tube::* distributions and put
> it in one place, ideally in a new method ok_map_functions() in the
> package Test::Map::Tube, similar to an existing method ok_map(). This
> way, anyone creating new map with Map::Tube, do not have to worry
> about testing the functionalities. Also depending on user
> requirements, they can either test just the map by calling ok_map() or
> just the map functions by calling ok_map_functions() or both."
>
> My objective is to keep the distribution using Map::Tube as light as
> possible with as few dependencies as possible. This would encourage
> more people to add more map ideally :-)
The good thing is that it's just us four (I think) having Map::Tube::* modules, and there is probably no "GreyPAN" code directly depending on Map::Tube, so backward incompatible changes are relatively easy to manage. So if this does not happen too often then I am fine with the situation as it is now. I just have a second life as a CPAN Tester, and I review all fail reports my smokers generate, so yesterday I had a lot of reports to look over (about 500 fail reports for Map::Tube::* modules)...
Regards,
Slaven