So I would like to have cross platform report on CPAN module availability
this what you're after?
Re:Is...
gabor on 2007-04-14T10:11:15
I think this is more or less the same as the one I generated here. I send a patch to Acme to integrate it into CPAN Testers. These are generated based on the test reports. Such as your, I think.What I am looking for right now is the list of modules already provided by the distribution such as this page for Ubuntu Dapper but for other distros and in the opposite direction too. (So a module author could look up her modules to see which distro carries it already (and which version of her module is supplied) or a distro maintainer could easily find out if other distros carry a specific module.
Re:Is...
barbie on 2007-04-14T12:22:11
Listing the distros per instance is my next task. I only took a look at the code this morning, so didn't get the time to add that bit in. I want to tidy it up a bit, as I think all the patched versions of perl should really apply to just one version of perl. Then once that's sorted each value will be a click thru to list all the distros that passed for that version of perl on the specific platform.
Re:Is...
gabor on 2007-04-14T12:58:25
IMHO it would be better to integrate all this into CPAN::WWW::Testers of Acme that generates http://cpantesters.perl.org/ so that all this information shows up on one site nicely interconnected. Along with your other cpan tester related statistics.We might even try to bribe him to give us access to the machine we can also update it. What do you think?
I can send you my patch to v0.32 of the above module that generates those statistics. I am sure you can improve on them a lot.
Re:Is...
barbie on 2007-04-14T14:03:05
Because it's a completely different codebase, the parsing for the statistics is different (e.g. CPAN::WWW::Testers ignores the PAUSE uploads) and the site generation bears no resemblance, I don't see any point trying to merge them.
To my mind the two sites serve different purposes. Acme's sites is more useful to authors and users of specific modules, whereas mine looks at a much bigger picture.
Plus CWT requires no manual intevention, whereas the stats site requires manual work to verify the tester addresses as well as some of the suspect reports submissions and PAUSE uploads before the site is generated, hence why it only gets updated once a month.
Behind the scenes I check every upload and notify authors if their distributions are not correctly formatted to enable them to be tested by the cpan-testers. I also verify all reports to ensure that the testing scripts are producing the correctly formatted reports. It's helped to quickly fix broken scripts and highlighted bugs in the widely used systems. CWT ignores any report that doesn't fit the necessary format.
