"Michael Peppler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Personally I think the current rating system should be enough - only not > enough people use it (for example my modules have only one or two > ratings, yet they are used by a lot of people, and have been for many > years).
I would have gladely rated your modules but they unfortunately provide functionality that I don't need (yet). I might have expressed myself wrongly. I like the rating system that we have and I think it's a great tool. I propose to have a tougher rating system. And I think that would let people rate "negatively" as well as "positively". What I would have like is to make the rating more visible. I have to go into the module's page to see it's rating. I'd rather see it beside the modules name. Hell, I'd like to see nice rating beside my modules so someone uses them (guys go and rate my modules, I'll rate yours. Data::TreeDumper is of use to anyone who has ever used Data::Dumper) > Why don't you start by rating those modules that you feel are horribly > lacking with 0 stars? Good question indeed and I am not the only one rating positively only because it's not part of our culture. I believe that it's because of: 1/ We know it's tough to write free software and we want to encourage more than we want to make modules better with positive criticism. 2/ There are two many bozos that as soon as you criticize there work, flame back (a bad reflex) or tell you to patch or write the damn thing yourself or that they do it in their free time and that one should be greatfull for their extravagant generosity (to stfu in one word). As if those who criticize them are not their pairs but some 3rd rank imbeciles that know nothing. I push it a bit here, of course not all projects are like that (check the arch-tla list for an example) and sometimes the users are real pain where it hurts but I've seen and had those discussion too much. I used to think that it was cultural (I'm from the mediteranean, we can insult each others great great ancestor and be brothers 5 minutes later) but I gave up that theory; it's the "open source" culture without the "open source" responsibility and adulthood that is the cause(my new theory at least). There is another reason why I don't rate zero starts, most of the time I get frustrated by the documentation. It's non existant or empty or not worth much. An API listing is no documentation some people should understand that. Just getting to use the module is a more a detective job than a programmer's one. How can I rate the module when the documentation to help me understand the module is not even there? The only thing I can rate is the documentation I can't (well I could) rate the rest of the module zero when it might have a great potential (which quite a lot of modules have) Lastly, taking one module a week and rate it would be a great help to other perl developers. Cheers, Nadim.
