I thought when creating a new module intended for publishing on CPAN why not using a best practice boilerplate to get it right.

Some searching in the archives recommended ExtUtils::ModuleMaker and Module::Maker both also available with PerlBestPractices sub-modules.

First of all the created files where not as correct as expected, though I was asked for an "abstract" it wasn't included into the module. Well this could be done manually, I could spend another time searching the problem.

BUT to my huge surprise the first testrun on a virgin module failed

#   Failed test "Pod coverage on Macro"
#   at /usr/local/share/perl/5.10.0/Test/Pod/Coverage.pm line 126.
# Macro: couldn't find pod
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 1.
[download]

Couldn't find POD? This file had no subs but already plenty of POD...

After hours of debugging, playing with the POD and patching Test::Pod::Coverage it turned out that the test wasn't able to find and require my module. (thanks for this brilliant error message, Andy!)

The test looked like this

#!perl -T

use Test::More;
eval "use Test::Pod::Coverage 1.04";
plan skip_all => "Test::Pod::Coverage 1.04 required for testing POD co
+verage"
    if $@;
all_pod_coverage_ok();
[download]

and the "-T" taint disabled the inclusion of PERL5LIB into @INC. In other words I couldn't point perl to use modules from my development directory.

ATM I left the "-T" out, but I could also extend the test to push "../lib" to @INC.

questions:

whats the recommended approach for testing?

should I use another approach than setting PERL5LIB?

shouldn't a fracking boilerplate test already cover such a case?

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

Comment on ExtUtils::ModuleMaker::PBP and Test::Pod::Coverage problems Select or Download Code