Port dependencies on p5-Test-*

[Yen-Ming Lee]

2008/2/27, Lars Balker Rasmussen <lars at balker.dk>:
> There's nothing easy about it, but it's not a CATASTROPHE to put too much
>  in PERL_DEPENDS.  And it's quite simple:  Jifty is buggy, since it doesn't
>  put Test-modules in build_requires rather than requires, so do what you can
>  to send patches upstream - I've landed myself a Catalyst commit-bit, because
>  I've complained about the form of their modules too many times.
>
>  When there are a few build_requires (instead of none), the developers tend
>  to begin thinking about where modules are needed, and the situation will
>  improve over time.
>
>  As for Test-modules in Jifty - Jifty includes its own test-modules, so it
>  can't be fully installed without them.

Okay. I do vote for PERL_DEPENDS family which help us to skip the
dual-life modules, but just want to mention that we may expect some
port maintainers follow the lazy module authors and put everything in
PERL_DEPENDS. In that case we will still get Test::* or other
modules-needed-for-tests-only in runtime dependency, and build a lot
of ports we don't need. Remember the subject of this thread -- "Port
dependencies on p5-Test-*".

For Jifty, the following ones are used for tests only, and should be
in PERL_TEST_DEPENDS. I'm not sure if the list is correct/complete or
not, just give you some ideas that it might be hard to find out the
dependency for tests only.

p5-libwww
p5-ExtUtils-Command
p5-Test-Base
p5-Test-MockModule
p5-Test-MockObject
p5-Module-CoreList [if PERL_LEVEL < 500902]

And, p5-Test-HTTP-Server-Simple and p5-Test-WWW-Mechanize are needed
for Jifty::Test, its own test module(s), so I think we should keep
them in PERL_DEPENDS.

I'd talked to much, and now it's time to back to code.

Thanks and regards,
-- 
Yen-Ming Lee <leeym at leeym.com>