Le 2013-06-23 18:27:13, ETHER a écrit :
Show quoted text> Would it be useful for the plugin to check dynamic_config in metadata,
> and issue a more strong warning at build time if it is set? such
> as a warning, rather than a simple informational message: "Warning:
> this distribution has dynamic_config=>1 - we may not be able to
> properly report on all actual prereqs."
No, I don't want to harrass developers with false positive. The dynamic config is not always about dynamic dependencies.
And for the case of dynamic dependencies the developer can have them reported by ReportVersions::Tiny by listing them explicitely with the 'include' config option.
If a module is neither listed in prereqs or as an 'include' I think that I can safely assume that the developer is not interested in the reporting of its version.
Show quoted text> That would be a good clue for the developer that what's generated in
> this .t file may not be accurate
I expect the developer to check the output of its testsuite before a release.
Show quoted text> and they should swap out the
> implementation.
Of course harassing the users of this module with false positive warnings is a good way to make them not use it anymore.
So I will not merge the second commit of your PR.
Karen, to extend my knowledge of the dynamic_config use case I'm interested in CPAN distributions you may have seen in the wild that use ReportVersions::Tiny with dynamic_config. Do you have some pointers?
--
Olivier Mengué -
http://perlresume.org/DOLMEN