in reply to Author tests or standard tests?

Some historical background, in case it is of some use.

The Oslo Consensus (May 2008)

The Lancaster Consensus (April 2013)

See The Lancaster Consensus and The Annotated Lancaster Consensus for full details.

Historically, AUTOMATED_TESTING has been confusing, used for a number of different purposes:

  1. I don't want the user to interact with this test.
  2. This is a long-running test.
  3. This test depends on an external website (say) and I don't want to stop the user installing if it fails, but I want to see what CPAN smokers experienced.

The Lancaster Consensus clarifies the semantics of AUTOMATED_TESTING and RELEASE_TESTING and adds three new environment variables, making a total of five:

To run module tests after installation, use new target "make test-installed", equivalent to "make test" but without adding blib to @INC.

Some Related CPAN Modules

See also: Perl CPAN test metadata in addition to The Oslo Consensus and The Lancaster Consensus covers The Berlin Consensus (2015) and PTS Oslo (2018)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Author tests or standard tests?
by stevieb (Canon) on Nov 06, 2018 at 21:37 UTC

    I'm glad this thread got posted. I'd never heard of this "Lancaster Consensus" before. Took a brief glance before going into a meeting here, but it definitely looks interesting enough to read later today.