# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Randy W. Sims
# on Sunday 01 August 2004 09:54 pm:
> If ratings are used to compare modules (as opposed to
>judging each according to its merrits), some modules might be
>overlooked, especially new modules.
True, and the "popularity metric" that I was proposing would probably only
worsen the situation.
>Are ratings usefull? I won't argue
>that reviews are usefull. And ratings provide a summary of reviews, so
>are helpfull in that respect. But can ratings be harmfull? ...
It depends on the complexity of the module (or the task that the module
facilitates.) And, on the user. IMO, CPAN should provide as much
information as is possible in a compact and accurate way.
If I'm basically digging through a namespace on CPAN, I'm likely to try the
first module which looks like it has a simple interface and fills the bill.
Seems that a popularity metric and ratings would just help highlight this
module.
Typically, I'll install it and try it. If it is too simplistic or doesn't
function the way I want it to, I'll peek at the code and consider modifying
it or looking for a more fully-featured module.
If it is too complicated (maybe I'm looking for a more DWIM module), I'll go
digging some more.
If this is somewhat typical, new modules which don't do something new won't
get found, but new modules which have something to offer will.
If they get rated, then we'll have two or three highly rated modules fitting
the same description. One is the DWIM, another is the kitchen-sink version,
and maybe the third is the object-oriented kitchen-sink version.
So, if ratings are harmful, which hurts more? The pain of your module not
getting found or the collective pain of everybody not finding the module they
want?
--Eric
--
"Chess is a foolish expedient for making idle people believe
they are doing something very clever when they are only wasting
their time."
--George Bernard Shaw
