Latest upstream release: 1.006000 Current version/release in Fedora Rawhide: 1.005000-1.fc22 URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Moo/ Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a stable branch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Updates_Policy More information about the service that created this bug can be found at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Upstream_release_monitoring
Taking. Moo-1.006000 intoduced a new method "coerce" and other perl modules started to utilize this. I.e. Moo >= 1.006000 is BR: of these.
Updated on f21 and rawhide. Does anybody know a reason for not upgrading Moo on f19 and f20? I did a couple of random rebuilds of packages BR:-ing perl-Moo and so far haven't found any issues.
Common sense and Fedora update guidelines. Just that your few packages does crash does not mean there is no change in behavior F19 or F20 users can depend on.
(In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #3) > Common sense and Fedora update guidelines. Just that your few packages does > crash does not mean there is no change in behavior F19 or F20 users can > depend on. It's also common sense to fix known bugs and not to carry around dependency chains which block other packages from fixing, like we currently do with Moo-1.003001. That said, one needs to compromise and balance the trade-offs and is why I am asking.
Moo-1.006000 breaks perl-MooX-Types-MooseLike tests. The stack trace changed since Moo-1.00500, whose output is parsed by the test: # Failed test 'The error looks like a useful stacktrace' # at t/basic.t line 322. # 'isa check for "an_undef" failed: is not undef! at (eval 24) line 452. # eval {...} called at (eval 24) line 450 # MooX::Types::MooseLike::Test::new("MooX::Types::MooseLike::Test", "an_undef", "") called at t/basic.t line 321 # main::__ANON__() called at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Test/Fatal.pm line 45 # Test::Fatal::try {...} () called at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Try/Tiny.pm line 76 # eval {...} called at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Try/Tiny.pm line 72 # Try::Tiny::try(CODE(0x262b5e0), Try::Tiny::Catch=REF(0x262b2b0)) called at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Test/Fatal.pm line 52 # Test::Fatal::exception(CODE(0x247d838)) called at t/basic.t line 322 # ' # doesn't match '(?^:is not undef.*\n.*MooX::Types::MooseLike::Test::new.*basic\.t)' # Looks like you failed 1 test of 74. t/basic.t ........................ Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100) Failed 1/74 subtests That's one of the reasons I do not rebase largely changed packages in older Fedoras. You can break code which worked before.
perl-Moo-1.006000 also depends on perl(Module::Runtime) >= 0.014 => For now, we will have let rot perl-Moo in Fedora < f21 It's a shame for Fedora having to expose users to known bugs.