Re: 2.0 testing

[Neil Gunton <ne...@nilspace.com>]

Kaare Rasmussen wrote:
> What kind of bugs ?

See thread titled "Re: Nested <DL> Bug in 2.0b9" started on July 2nd,
continued on August 10th (Gerald said, in summary, that no progress on
the bug had been made). This is when I suggested use of SourceForge for
bug tracking.

Incidentally, I still think that 2.0 would be better if it was able to
take existing 1.x code unchanged. This was already discussed, and Gerald
asserted that 1.x code should work unchanged in 2.0. But (apparently due
to bugs rather than design) this still isn't the case. See thread titled
"Re: Testing 2.x with production 1.x code" from early July. Again, I
haven't heard anything from Gerald on this since then.

I have a lot of code, and I can't change it to break my production 1.x
system until 2.x is more stable. If you're working with new code then
this may not be a problem, but it's certainly a showstopper for me.
Until I can get my existing 1.x sites working under 2.0b without having
to make changes that break 1.x, I can't do real testing. I mean "real"
as in real users hitting it on a daily basis - I'd love to be able to do
this, if I could be able to roll back to 1.x until any bugs discovered
are cleared up, at which point I could plug the new 2.0b back in and go
again.

/Neil

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: embperl-unsubscribe@perl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: embperl-help@perl.apache.org