in reply to No More Excuses For Not Testing Modules On Windows

No more excuses? Apart from having no clue how to actually do something on a window box, the fact there's red tape involved to get an account, and then more red tape to actually get time on the box(es), as they are configured for "single use" (which for someone coming from a Unix background sounds quite alien), the posting is quite silent on the process. Given that there's already a hurdle to even get started, I for one, am not jumping for the chance to test out my modules on Windows.

Don't get me wrong. I think Adam did a wonderful job. And I am sure lots of people will use the service. Just don't go that there "no more excuses" and that everyone ought to test their modules on Windows.

  • Comment on Re: No More Excuses For Not Testing Modules On Windows

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: No More Excuses For Not Testing Modules On Windows
by Limbic~Region (Chancellor) on Jul 20, 2009 at 14:38 UTC
    JavaFan,
    Your points are all fair and accurate. I wanted a catchy title to get people to read the post and had intended to caveat with a disclaimer in the body. I got caught up in explaining why I was posting here when it was already on use.perl and forgot the disclaimer. Adam does go on to point out that if you IRC or can do email, he will do whatever he can to help someone interested out. It isn't as easy as 1 2 3 though and I should have reviewed it a 3rd time before clicking create.

    Cheers - L~R

[reply]

      I agree that "no more excuses" sounds better than "new and improved excuses" or "less fattening excuses now available" or "all your excuses are belong to us", etc.

      Thanks for the news.

[reply]
Re^2: No More Excuses For Not Testing Modules On Windows
by Bloodnok (Vicar) on Jul 21, 2009 at 10:00 UTC
    Hmmm, if it wasn't for the OP, I, for one, wouldn't have known about the resource - having not, AFAIR, heard of the website </ignorance>

    Agreed, the user thang does seem strange, but hey, anything that has the capability, however remote, of making the resource usable shouldn't, IMO, be discounted out-of-hand.

    Suffice it to say, if I ever manage to get the/my modules in a fit enough state, I shall (be attempting to) use the resource as appropriate.

    A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))
[reply]
      Agreed, the user thang does seem strange, but hey, anything that has the capability, however remote, of making the resource usable shouldn't, IMO, be discounted out-of-hand.
      This is exactly the naive black-and-white thinking I'm fighting against. The OP takes the news that there's a Windows testing environment and makes it a "no more excuses" posting. I tried to temper that black-and-white thinking, and you suggest that I "discount it out-of-hand".

      Come on people. If you want to be taken seriously, recognize there's a lot between white and black. I didn't discount Adams work; in fact, I praised him for that in my post. I just pointed out that the existence of the service won't mean everyone is going to jump through the hoops and test their modules using the service. Some will, some won't.

[reply]
        I know you praised him [Adam] for his work - I read and agreed with, it.

        The rest of your post suggested, to me, that you have, or intend to, discount the resource resulting from Adams' hard work.

        Maybe less fewer sensitivities would be inflamed if the OP were to be re-titled along the lines of "One less excuse" (c/w "No more excuses") - that would bring the topic into the realms of LPF (Logic of Partial Functions aka 3 valued logic). thus removing the binary black/white nature, wouldn't it ?

        Update:

        Amendment for better grammar.

        A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))
[reply]

In Section Perl News