Original Message: ----------------- From: Struan Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> And if you're including the code in several CPAN modules then > shouldn't the code be up to standard for general use? Just because you > can't see anyone wanting to use it doesn't mean it shouldn't be > documented. The code is fine, it's quite simple and doesn't really need docs, however I don't really want anyone else using it because then it becomes a responsibilty. There are plenty of similar modules contained within existing distributions. They are not polished, have no pod etc. They are only to be used from within the distribution itself and only need to be understood by people changing the distribution in question. I don't think this bothers people too much. My module is like these, it has previously shipped inside another distro, undocumented, unexposed. I want to use it with several other modules but I don't want to cut and paste. As it happens, it looks like the original Class::MethodMaker has an undocumented way to do what I want, so for this module it may not be an issue but everyone has their own file slurping routine and various other bits and bobs that they do their own way, rather than copying them into lots of modules, a personal namespace of utility stuff could be useful. Also somewhere to put things which are under review is also useful and seems to have been lost in the methodmaker discussion. > Anyone using one of those CPAN modules shouldn't have to > ferret around in source code to realise what your convience methods > are there for. Ideally, anyone using one of my CPAN modules shouldn't have to ferret around in any of my code documented or not but if they are then chances are that documenting these particular bits would make no difference, F -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
