On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 09:16:58PM -0700, Karen Etheridge wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:30:45PM +1000, sisyphus1@optusnet.com.au wrote:

Uploading 0.54_03 has revealed that the problem in detecting the pre-requisites does, in fact, pertain to *my* release.

Reini’s 0.54_02 doesn’t suffer these failures – so let’s do a diff on his Makefile.PL files (0.54_02) versus mine (0.54_03).
Diffs are attached.

The C/Makefile.PL difference pertains only to whitespace inside a print() statement ... surely nothing there that could have an effect. correct.
And the top level Makefile.PL difference is:
This prompted me to go look at your distribution:


I notice there's no META.yml file, so static analysis can't
detect any prereqs. * This doesn't affect (most) installations, but it hurts
sites like metacpan from informing the user what the prereqs are.

Note that rurban's release *did* contain a META.yml and META.json. If you do a
diff of the full distribution actually uploaded, vs. what's in the
repository, this becomes apparent:

I hit send too soon!
I should have added: you can ensure that a META.yml is included in the
distribution by: 'perl Makefile.PL; make dist' and uploading the tarball
that is produced. You shouldn't ever be manually tarring up the repository
directory and shipping that.

And footnote added to above:
* I don't think this should cause an effect, at least. But it seems to be
for the smoker reports you've received. Perhaps someone more familiar with
the smoker setup can shed some light here.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 8 of 11 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-testers-discuss @
postedApr 9, '14 at 5:41a
activeApr 11, '14 at 1:38a



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase