Grokbase Groups Perl qa October 2005

On Monday 10 October 2005 23:41, Andy Lester wrote:
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 02:27:03PM -0700, Michael G Schwern
( wrote:
The way you've broken down the nattier bits of Test::Harness, such as
_show_results(), into digestable functions has value. I'd like to see
that sort of thing as patches to Test::Harness rather than in a fork.
I do NOT want to see that sort of thing as patches to Test::Harness.

I would like anyone who presumes that he's going to change the internals
of a module I maintain to talk to me about a general overview of the
changes first, rather than a sweep of the hand that says "What you have
here must be eradicated and replaced by my method that is clearly
better." That way we can talk about what direction things can go,
rather than having a pile of patches that won't be used.
You are right. Thing is that I noticed Test::Harness had monlithic functions,
and wasn't an object (and thus did not have over-ridable methods), etc. I
wanted to heavily revamp it and change the entire code, in a non-compatible
way, but did not know exactly what I was going to do, because I had no
intimate knowledge of the code.

Converting T::S::H to have an object instance that will be pass around from
function to function was the first thing I did. Later it facilitated adding
more refactorings.
But it's bigger than that.

Frankly, Shlomi, I continue to be insulted by your sweeping changes:

my @projects = (
"language, Perl," => "Rindolf",
Actually, Rindolf was supposed an alternative to _Perl 6_, due to me being
unhappy with it. Originally, it was not supposed to be backwards compatible
with Perl 5, but later was compatible.
"" => "",
Actually it's more accurately "" => "".
"" is orthoganal to both. Perlmeme was started without my
involvement, and I found myself contributing to it only further. Perl-Begin,
OTOH is my baby.

My history with is this:

1. I began writing perl-begin out of frustration from

2. A news item I wrote about it, was re-routed to the guys,
where it was decided that I will do a redesign and extension of l.p.o.

3. After Perl-Begin was in a more complete state, I tried to recommend the
l.p.o guys to integrate its changes in the site. No-one responded. I tried to
subscribe to, but I couldn't because it's not open
for subscribers. I also wasn't added manually.

4. Without too much choice, I set up and hosted my
version of the site there.

5. Eventually, I contacted the admins about linking to perl-begin,
and they decided that instead of, which was heavily
unmaintained, they should instead have a section.
I designed such a page, and submitted a patch against the sources to
the admins. They had their share of trouble from then, and as a
result, it wasn't integrated.

"Test::Harness" => "Test::Shlomif::Harness",
I plan Test::Shlomif::Harness (whatever it will be permananetly named) to be
an alternative to Test::Harness. One would be able to use it instead, and
exploit its better modularity and extensibility. There is still a lot of code
that uses Test::Harness around, and so Test::Harness still needs to be
maintained. I also plan to implement a Test::Harness-compatible module
eventually that makes use of Test::Shlomif::Harness. (but did not get to it

Think of T::S::H vs. Test::Harness as Module::Build to ExtUtils::MakeMaker, or
CPANPLUS to CPAN, or PONIE to perl 5.
Your attitude is inappropriate and counteractive for a community-based
open source project like Perl and Perl testing. The first mention of
this harness was a few weeks ago, when we were notified that you were
going to fork Test::Harness. Forking a project should be the path of
LAST RESORT, not the first. See also
I realize the problem with forking. However, I span-off the codebase, in order
to convert it to something much better. I asked for your permission to do
that, and outlined my plans, and you gave me your permission. So I went on to
"show you the code", and back my words with code.
I would be glad to talk to you one-on-one on specific plans and features
for Test::Harness. Nik Clayton and I, for example, have worked out some
changes to the straps mechanism that fits his needs. My email address
and AIM account are in every email. Until then, I'm not interested.
OK, we'll talk on AIM.


Shlomi Fish

Shlomi Fish

95% of the programmers consider 95% of the code they did not write, in the
bottom 5%.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 8 of 18 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupqa @
postedOct 10, '05 at 8:57p
activeNov 6, '05 at 3:15p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase