https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385280 --- Comment #9 from Van de Bugger <van.de.bugger@xxxxxxxxx> --- > It's ridiculous generalizing all the tests are not worth of documentation. They are tests, not examples. > It would help if you explained why you feel this is a bug. It is my feeling. I already said that tests are part of Perl distribution. Perl distribution installer (either cpan, cpanp, or cpanm), unpacks distribution archive, builds the module (if there are parts written in C), run tests (optionally send reports), and installs the module to the system. Tests are *not* installed. They remain in the temporary directory, which is usually removed soon. (I have large local Perl library installed directly from CPAN, it contains ~1500 *.pm files and *no* *single* *.t file.) RPM package contains prebuilt and "pretested" software. Packed software was built and tested when RPM itself was building. When RPM package is installing to the user system, it just copies files (no source compiling, no testing at all (akmods are exception)). If original Perl distribution does not install tests, why RPM does it? > Sometimes the tests are the only available useful documentation. Anyway, it is not a reason for installing tests. End-users are not interested in tests at all. Developers may be interested, but… Did RPM packager take care about *test dependencies*? Tests may have specific requirements. For a Perl developer having local Perl library (of modules installed directly from CPAN) have many advantages over using RPMs. > Each package must be considered specially… Indeed, it would be much better to have a policy. Again: If original Perl distribution does not install tests, why RPM does it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
