FAQ
+#
+# If some modules fail this, you need a version bump (_001, etc.)
+# AND you should probably also nudge the upstream maintainer for
+# example by filing a bug, with a patch attached and linking to
+# the core change.

But this test only applies to modules that have blead for upstream, so
the comment is wrong. For things with blead upstream, we don’t use
_001, so it is again wrong.

Search Discussions

  • Jarkko Hietaniemi at Dec 7, 2014 at 12:44 am

    On Saturday-201412-06, 19:42, Father Chrysostomos wrote:
    +#
    +# If some modules fail this, you need a version bump (_001, etc.)
    +# AND you should probably also nudge the upstream maintainer for
    +# example by filing a bug, with a patch attached and linking to
    +# the core change.

    But this test only applies to modules that have blead for upstream, so
    the comment is wrong. For things with blead upstream, we don’t use
    _001, so it is again wrong.
    The best way ever to get someone to fix stuff: claim it has been fixed.
  • Jarkko Hietaniemi at Dec 7, 2014 at 12:49 am

    On Saturday-201412-06, 19:44, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
    But this test only applies to modules that have blead for upstream, so
    the comment is wrong. For things with blead upstream, we don’t use
    _001, so it is again wrong.
    The best way ever to get someone to fix stuff: claim it has been fixed.
    And furthermore: so what the heck one *IS* supposed to do in this case,
    then? There's kind of "slow upstream", there is threads distro, but as
    long as it's not updated and synced back (weeks? months?) the porting
    test will keep failing.

    >
  • Father Chrysostomos at Dec 7, 2014 at 12:57 am

    Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
    On Saturday-201412-06, 19:44, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
    But this test only applies to modules that have blead for upstream, so
    the comment is wrong. For things with blead upstream, we don’t use
    _001, so it is again wrong.
    The best way ever to get someone to fix stuff: claim it has been fixed.
    I don't know what you mean by that.
    And furthermore: so what the heck one *IS* supposed to do in this case,
    then? There's kind of "slow upstream", there is threads distro, but as
    long as it's not updated and synced back (weeks? months?) the porting
    test will keep failing.
    I think we are talking past each other. Your comment in cmp_version.t
    says to prod the upstream maintainer. I think you mean the downstream
    maintainer.

    (Would my interlocutor prefer that this deponent address him in the
    third person? :-)
  • Jarkko Hietaniemi at Dec 7, 2014 at 1:13 am

    And furthermore: so what the heck one*IS* supposed to do in this case,
    then? There's kind of "slow upstream", there is threads distro, but as
    long as it's not updated and synced back (weeks? months?) the porting
    test will keep failing.
    I think we are talking past each other. Your comment in cmp_version.t
    says to prod the upstream maintainer. I think you mean the downstream
    maintainer.
    Kind of. I know of the "dist" vs "cpan", but CPAN is upstream in my
    map, regardless of terminology.
    (Would my interlocutor prefer that this deponent address him in the
    third person? :-)
    The Royal we cannot decide.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupperl5-porters @
categoriesperl
postedDec 7, '14 at 12:43a
activeDec 7, '14 at 1:13a
posts5
users2
websiteperl.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase