Skip Menu |

Preferred bug tracker

Please visit the preferred bug tracker to report your issue.

This queue is for tickets about the Log-Any-Adapter-TAP CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 98964
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: Log-Any-Adapter-TAP

People
Owner: NERDVANA [...] cpan.org
Requestors: dolmen [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: (no value)
Broken in: 0.002000_03
Fixed in: 0.003000



Subject: Changes did not change
Hi,

You published a few releases today, but the 'Changes' file does not mention what changed...

-- 
Olivier Mengué - http://perlresume.org/DOLMEN - https://gratipay.com/dolmen/
On Thu Sep 18 10:24:35 2014, DOLMEN wrote: Show quoted text
> Hi, > > You published a few releases today, but the 'Changes' file does not mention > what changed... > > -- > Olivier Mengué - http://perlresume.org/DOLMEN - https://gratipay.com/dolmen/
Hi, thanks for the vigilance! What I was actually doing with the _00 _01 _02 releases was trying to get it right for the real 0.002000 release. I kept noticing flaws once I had published it. (it helps me to see it from the user's perspective when I can look at the real CPAN page and pretend its someone else's module and I'm trying to learn about it) Also I wanted to see some cpan tester results from other versions/platforms. So, what I did with each dev release was update the Changes file under the 0.2.0 section. It should be fairly complete.
Marking resolved, unless you have anything to add.
Le 2014-09-20 07:20:35, NERDVANA a écrit :
Show quoted text
> Marking resolved, unless you have anything to add.

The problem is that version numbers for package have different issues in some parts of the Perl environment:
http://www.dagolden.com/index.php/369/version-numbers-should-be-boring/

I don't think it is safe to publish 0.002000 after 0.002000_01, as some tools may be confused. For example, rt.cpan.org is confused as it orders the releases in ASCII order in the "Fixed in" list, so 0.002000 is before 0.002000_00 and 0.002000_01.

At least as a human I am confused by this.
That's why a clear 'Changes' file that mention the intermediate development releases would clarify this.
Another way would be to completely skip 0.002000 once you used this for a _01 dev release. That's how ExtUtils::MakeMaker does: 6.96, 6.97_01, 6.97_02, 6.98. That would ensure that both tools and humans are not confused.

-- 
Olivier Mengué - http://perlresume.org/DOLMEN - https://gratipay.com/dolmen/
On Sat Sep 20 18:15:05 2014, DOLMEN wrote: Show quoted text
> Le 2014-09-20 07:20:35, NERDVANA a écrit :
> > Marking resolved, unless you have anything to add.
> > The problem is that version numbers for package have different issues > in some > parts of the Perl environment: > http://www.dagolden.com/index.php/369/version-numbers-should-be- > boring/ > > I don't think it is safe to publish 0.002000 after 0.002000_01, as > some tools > may be confused. For example, rt.cpan.org is confused as it orders the > releases > in ASCII order in the "Fixed in" list, so 0.002000 is before > 0.002000_00 and > 0.002000_01. > > At least as a human I am confused by this. > That's why a clear 'Changes' file that mention the intermediate > development > releases would clarify this. > Another way would be to completely skip 0.002000 once you used this > for a _01 > dev release. That's how ExtUtils::MakeMaker does: 6.96, 6.97_01, > 6.97_02, 6.98. > That would ensure that both tools and humans are not confused. > > -- > Olivier Mengué - http://perlresume.org/DOLMEN - > https://gratipay.com/dolmen/
I have deleted the offending test-releases, since they weren't really intended for the public anyway. Also, the module has a new unambiguous version now.