Steffen Mueller wrote: > Hi perl-qa, > > there's been a lot of discussion about CPANTS metrics in the recent past. > > How about a mandatory or optional metric for modules registered with the > modules list? Why is that a sign of (q|kw)alit(y|ee)? Because it means > the author has the blessing of the module list maintainers as far as the > choice of namespace goes. Furthermore, modules registered with modules@ > can provide some more meta-information via PAUSE. (DLSIP string) > > What do you think?
I think the modules list and the blessing of its maintainers has been irrelevant for years even before search.cpan.org completely eliminated the need for it. In fact, modules in the list are likely old school and have rot similar to those in the core. Since a measure of kwalitee is supposed to be a thing associated with quality modules it would be interesting to do a survey of the modules in the module list and see just how good they are. As for DLSIP, most of the information in the DLSIP string can now be put in META.yml. The rest is either largely irrelevant (do I care if a module uses OO or functions? No) or can be added. The info in META.yml is much more useful (example, DLSIP just tells you there's a mailing list but META.yml tells you the address). Because updating DLSIP is a separate step divorced from the module code there's a high chance the author will completely forget about it. META.yml has a much better chance to be kept up to date. I'd bet money most of the DLSIP strings are out of date.
