On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Ken Williams wrote: > I was sort of hoping this idea would just die on its own, but now it > looks like people are actually getting ready to do it. In my opinion > this is a bad idea. I don't want a bunch of reviews all over CPAN > disguising themselves as modules. I also don't want CPAN sites to have > to figure out what's a review and what's not, so they can filter out > the reviews.
Agreed. I kind of hoped that by pointing out the steps that would be involved in posting a review, people would kind of get the clue that the proposal needs a little work. > What's wrong with making one of these newfangled things called "web > sites" to host reviews? Oh, I know - that already exists. So how > about working with those people to fix whatever you think is broken > about them before polluting CPAN with all this non-code? It would be really easy to set up a blog or whatever to handle this, but inevitably someone always asks the question "What About CPAN?" I'm probably not on enough Perl mailing lists to make an expert opinion, but the impression I get is that CPAN is a system without a clearly defined future. Questions always come up on who maintains it, where is the code, how do we add this feature, why is the module list out of date, etc, etc. CPAN works great for distributing perl code and modules, but as a software package, CPAN is a mystery to a lot of us. > > -Ken > -------------------- Christopher Josephes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
