Re: Let's eliminate the Module List

[Robert Rothenberg]

I'm ok with eliminating the list: I largely agree with the comments as to why 
it no longer servers the purpose it was intended for.

As for replacing it:
* search.cpan.org is better, but leaves a lot to be desired in terms of
  keywords.
* I'm not entirely against duplication of effort, since there are many ways
  to do things, and sometimes a duplicate module has a better way to do it.
* The categories for search.cpan.org need to be rethought, maybe even with
  subcategories.
  In some cases modules should be in multiple categories.
* I like the idea of some kind of official namespace annointing or reserving,
  provided it serves a clear purpose:
  - modules to be included in core or specialized distributions
  - minimum degree of quality control (minimum CPANTS rating?)
  This should proceed in definite stages, maybe with a kind of workflow
  system:
  1. module already exists on CPAN for minimum amount of time
  2. request made for namespace blessing
  3. "priests of namespace" verify that namespace has been discussed
     in relevant forums and makes sense with respect to some scheme
     which is publically available
  4. verify that module meets minimum standards (non-trivial tests,
     readme, changes, tests pass on variety of systems, if applicable,
     meta.yml, license, no glaring copyright or patent issues, etc.)
  5. verify that the module does not duplicate effort
  6. with problems resolved, module is approved with associated
     categories and keywords
  Likewise, there could be a scheme for "unblessing" a module:
  - quality falls below a certain level
  - copyright/patent issues emerge
  - author has fallen off the face of the earth
  - module has not been updated in X months but there are outstanding
    issues/bugs
  - many bad ratings by users in forums and cpanratings
  It would be a lot of work to implement a workflow system (I wish I had the
  time....), but once it's implemented, the approval work could be distributed
  among several trusted people.
  The nice thing about a workflow system is that authors can followup on
  requests, and users can use this to research information about a module.
  Yes, this goes beyond an official namespace list and becomes a kind of
  module underwriters kosher good housekeeping seal of approval.
  Note that if there is some kind of blessing scheme, it should include the
  usual disclaimers that we still do not guarantee it against damaging your
  data, employer, or marriage etc.
Well, that's my several cents.
Rob