Skip Menu |

This queue is for tickets about the File-ConfigDir CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 94849
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: File-ConfigDir

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: ANDK [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: 0.012
Fixed in: 0.013



Subject: Undeclared dependency on List::MoreUtils
As per subject. The following grep shows that L:M is only in "recommends", not in PREREQ_PM http://search.cpan.org/grep?release=File-ConfigDir-0.012;string=List::MoreUtils;n=3;C=2 And it also shows it is used in this line: lib/File/ConfigDir.pm 40:eval { use List::MoreUtils 'uniq'; }; This leads to fail reports about missing package L:M. Sample: http://www.cpantesters.org/cpan/report/40655325 HTH && Thanks, (Disclaimer: this was discovered by statistical analysis, I'm not speaking as a user)
List::MoreUtils is a recommendation and should stay.
I don't get it. If its absence causes a fail, then it is a prerequisite, not just a recommendation. Otherwise, please explain why not.
https://github.com/perl5-utils/File-ConfigDir/blob/master/lib/File/ConfigDir.pm#L40 L::MU has always been a recommendation and just a typo in 0.012 caused the failure. Please invest a little bit more time in investigation or simply trust my answers :)
On 20140428T184115Z, REHSACK wrote: Show quoted text
> Please invest a little bit more time in investigation or > simply trust my answers :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust,_but_verify
But you did: Don't trust and request prove. I don't hesitate when you verify - you could for example view the diff between 0.012 and 0.013 (or between 0.011 and 0.012 to see how stupid I introduced the bug ^^)
CC: ANDK [...] cpan.org
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #94849] Undeclared dependency on List::MoreUtils
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 05:20:00 +0200
To: bug-File-ConfigDir [...] rt.cpan.org
From: Andreas Koenig <andreas.koenig.7os6VVqR [...] franz.ak.mind.de>
"Jens Rehsack via RT" <bug-File-ConfigDir@rt.cpan.org> writes: Show quoted text
> But you did: Don't trust and request prove.
You don't have to answer bugreports but if you do answer, it's a fair game to actually provide an answer that clarifies not nebulizes. Show quoted text
> I don't hesitate when you verify - you could for example view the diff > between 0.012 and 0.013 (or between 0.011 and 0.012 to see how stupid > I introduced the bug ^^)
I just would like to help improving software. If you do not agree with this goal, feel free to ignore my reports. You do not owe me anything for them. -- andreas
On Mon Apr 28 23:20:21 2014, andreas.koenig.7os6VVqR@franz.ak.mind.de wrote: Show quoted text
> "Jens Rehsack via RT" <bug-File-ConfigDir@rt.cpan.org> writes: >
> > But you did: Don't trust and request prove.
> > You don't have to answer bugreports but if you do answer, it's a fair > game to actually provide an answer that clarifies not nebulizes.
I did - but I answer in a sentence, not a novel :) Show quoted text
> > I don't hesitate when you verify - you could for example view the diff > > between 0.012 and 0.013 (or between 0.011 and 0.012 to see how stupid > > I introduced the bug ^^)
> > I just would like to help improving software. If you do not agree with > this goal, feel free to ignore my reports. You do not owe me anything > for them. >
Well, I didn't intend to miff you - I give you a hint how to use the extra value GitHub provides ... When I have to count every time where I have to get those information by comparing the extracted tarballs ...
CC: ANDK [...] cpan.org
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #94849] Undeclared dependency on List::MoreUtils
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 08:07:19 +0200
To: bug-File-ConfigDir [...] rt.cpan.org
From: Andreas Koenig <andreas.koenig.7os6VVqR [...] franz.ak.mind.de>
"Jens Rehsack via RT" <bug-File-ConfigDir@rt.cpan.org> writes: Show quoted text
>> You don't have to answer bugreports but if you do answer, it's a fair >> game to actually provide an answer that clarifies not nebulizes.
> > I did - but I answer in a sentence, not a novel :)
Since you now answer in another three sentences we're getting closer to a novel than anybody needs. Show quoted text
> Well, I didn't intend to miff you - I give you a hint how to use the > extra value GitHub provides ...
In your first answer you chose a sentence of very low significance on the actual matter. Calling it a hint is an overstatement. Neither a hint that the bug is fixed, nor where it is fixed. No indication in which direction the code might evolve or might have evolved. Ha, novel. "Fixed" would provide enough significant bits. Bug ticketing systems have the bonus of being around when we're not. They are also of value for third parties. One peculiar type of third party is a future self of a party involved. A sentence of significance would pay off for every reader. Show quoted text
> When I have to count every time where I have to get those information > by comparing the extracted tarballs ...
-- andreas
On Tue Apr 29 02:07:42 2014, andreas.koenig.7os6VVqR@franz.ak.mind.de wrote: Show quoted text
> "Jens Rehsack via RT" <bug-File-ConfigDir@rt.cpan.org> writes: >
> >> You don't have to answer bugreports but if you do answer, it's a fair > >> game to actually provide an answer that clarifies not nebulizes.
> > > > I did - but I answer in a sentence, not a novel :)
> > Since you now answer in another three sentences we're getting closer to > a novel than anybody needs.
It seems you need :P Show quoted text
> > Well, I didn't intend to miff you - I give you a hint how to use the > > extra value GitHub provides ...
> > In your first answer you chose a sentence of very low significance on > the actual matter. Calling it a hint is an overstatement. Neither a hint > that the bug is fixed, nor where it is fixed. No indication in which > direction the code might evolve or might have evolved. Ha, novel. > "Fixed" would provide enough significant bits.
I answered: Show quoted text
> List::MoreUtils is a recommendation and should stay.
And you figured out on you're own that there was a use statement within an eval block. So because you're much smarter than me, I didn't expect that you need an extra explanation that the eval was intentionally (beside a quick look into history and Changes would give an additional info about the 0.012 goal ^^). Show quoted text
> Bug ticketing systems have the bonus of being around when we're not. > They are also of value for third parties. One peculiar type of third > party is a future self of a party involved. A sentence of significance > would pay off for every reader.
Sure, but there is no need to copy the Changes and the diff's into the ticket system.