--- David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Where it becomes into a competition rather than a developer's tool > is that the scores are added together into one "Kwalitee" score > that assumes (or for which people assume): <snip>
Frankly, I think it's human nature to compete. Anytime someone puts up something whereby strict criteria can be used to assign a "score" to something (regardless of whether or not we agree with the chosen criteria), folks are going to note how their doing in relation to others. It doesn't matter whether or not people like this. If these scores are going to be public, for some it will be a competition. Myself, I was happy to see CPANTs and I "knew" I put out good quality code, but in retrospect, I do see from the metrics that there are some areas where I can improve. I do wonder, though, why Acme:: files are included in there. The very nature of these modules frequently guarantees that Kwalitee scores will be dragged down. Taking a less than random example: Acme::Code::Police No one is *ever* going to use this as a prereq (if they do, they should be first against the wall when the Acme::Code::FreedomFighter comes). Further, I can't use strict in that module (doing so would kill a bit of irony). And POD coverage for a module that consists of one line of code? We should at least throw the poor module author's a bone and leave Acme:: out of this. Cheers, Ovid PS: Someone should really write Acme::Code::Police::State. It would search for instances of Acme::Code::FreedomFighter and rename it to Acme::Code::Terrorist. Then recreate a new Acme::Code::FreedomFighter and symlink it to Terrorist.pm :) Turning the resulting State.pm into ASCII art of one's favorite hated politician is optional. -- If this message is a response to a question on a mailing list, please send follow up questions to the list. Web Programming with Perl -- http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/
