httpd-test-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Wheeler <>
Subject Re: Apache::TestMB
Date Tue, 22 Jun 2004 21:57:21 GMT
On Jun 22, 2004, at 2:44 PM, Stas Bekman wrote:

> It may be a fairly complex logic to add, though you could write 
> wrappers that simply push things into @ARGV, emulating the command 
> line.
> Though I'd rather have one way to do things. It's already a 
> non-trivial thing with all the multiple options. If we have to explain 
> to the user in trouble with the test suite more than one way to help 
> us show their problems, it makes things even more complex and 
> confusing. So if you can keep t/TEST as it is I think it'll be a good 
> thing. Feel free to convince me otherwise. Admittedly I have never 
> used MB, so I may miss some things.

I'll leave it; I don't have the tuits to change it. I'm just happy to 
have something that works with Module::Build. My only thought was that 
t/TEST seemed like a hack to get something Perlish to work in a C<make> 
environment. And since Module::Build is a Perl environment, that hack 
is no longer necessary. But I recognize that there has been a lot built 
up around that hack, so it's much simpler to follow the 80/20 rule and 
get it done the way it is.

> Somewhere around that code that deals with cmodules:
>   grep -Ir cmodules Apache-Test/lib/Apache/

Yes, Randy has been pointing it out. But does TestMB need this support 
in an initial release? Seems like those who depend on the Makefile will 
keep using TestMM for a while.

> No, no, it's fine. But don't worry, once the patch is finished I'll go 
> over it to make it consistent with the rest of the code. Most of 
> things are just perfect.

I figured. I like my style, too (mainly just cperl-mode style). ;-)

>>> I meant the fact that '$script.PL' doesn't interpolate $script.
>> Oh, duh. Fixed.
> I guess that part of the code is not really tested :)

I never, *ever,* create my own t/TEST.PL, so no, it isn't.

> Instead of:
> print "Bar tar car\n";
> use Apache::TestTrace;
> debug "Bar tar car\n";
> Now replace debug with whatever level you want this message to be 
> printed at. By default the trace level is 'info', so unless user 
> changes the default, traces:
>   emerg alert crit error warning notice info
> will always log things, whereas debug() won't. So for example in your 
> case you could use the notice() func. Apache::TestTrace really mimicks 
> the LogLevel from Apache.

Are you suggesting that it be used inside Apache::TestMB? There's only 
one print statement, in generate_script(), and there I followed the 
approach of Module::Build, even though TestMM used info.

So, what more do you need before committing this puppy? I'm ready to 
take advantage of it with my module and upload that module to CPAN! ;-)



View raw message