[Bioperl-l] Thoughts on some test reorganization

Sendu Bala bix at sendu.me.uk
Mon Nov 17 12:30:57 EST 2008

Hilmar Lapp wrote:
> In other words, not everyone out there upgrades the OS eagerly.
> I agree it's reasonable not to put a lot of energy into fixing bugs that 
> only show up under Perl prior to 5.8.x. But if BioPerl refuses to even 
> work (or spit out ugly warnings) under 5.6, isn't that a bit too much of 
> forcing upgrades on people who may not necessarily need it?

My thoughts as well.

Chris, did you see something specific to justify a change? Like, for 
1.5.2 there were specific modules/pragmas only first included in 5.6 
that motivated the change.

I don't think requiring people upgrade their perl just so we can enjoy 
some entirely /theoretical/ benefit really makes much sense.

More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list