Steven Schubiger wrote:
> As I was in the process of adding a freshly created testfile to
> the subdirectory t/ of a distribution I got biten when I ran
> the dist action because it was my natural assumption that the new
> file would be implicitly integrated - but it wasn't.
>
> So I had to rerun the manifest action on it to have it included.
>
> Is this intentional behaviour?
Yes, this is intentional. Files should never implicitly be added to the=20
manifest.
> If not, shouldn't we emit a warning for all files which aren't currently
> included and are not subject to exclusion by MANIFEST.SKIP when running
> the dist action?=20
That's what the "distcheck" action is for, but perhaps it is a good idea to=
=20
automatically run a "distcheck" on the "dist" action?
|