Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
Ovid wrote: --- David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: It can't be by the same author, though, to count for is_prereq, right? Nope. http://cpants.perl.org/dist/Lingua-EN-NameParse. Yup. (I think.) Listed as a prereq by Lingua-EN-MatchNames by BRIANL. http://cpants.perl.org/dist/Lingua-EN-MatchNames Bundles don't seem to be listed on CPANTS so I don't think that approach will work. I think the ACME idea by different authors is the way to go if someone really wants to break is_prereq as a valid test -- but then there will just be an escalating war of CPANTS blacklisting modules that exist only to prereq and new modules to get around the blacklists and so on. ;-) David
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
--- David Golden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It can't be by the same author, though, to count for is_prereq, > right? Nope. http://cpants.perl.org/dist/Lingua-EN-NameParse. I think I can create a Bundle::Ovid and win this point. Cheers, Ovid -- 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/
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
> It can't be by the same author, though, to count for is_prereq, right? > > So someone needs to create a new CPAN ID, and release a module under that ID > that prereqs all of CPAN. Then we'd all get our prereq points. > > Probably could be done with a Build.PL that pulls the full module list then > constructs a massive requires hash. Unless CPANTS scans for dependencies, > in which case you'd need to build the .pm file dynamically, too. And then > run a cron job to rebuild/re-release with cpan-upload every so often to keep > it fresh. This would definitely work, at the cost of massive inflation of the 'is_prereq' currency. Maybe a peer-to-peer is_prereq network could be created where each CPAN author enters reciprocal agreements with other like-minded authors to list their modules as prerequisites of one of his or her own modules. Each auther could have a special empty 'dependent' module for this purpose. Something like ACME::Prereq::[AUTHOR_ID]. Michael --- Michael Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
It can't be by the same author, though, to count for is_prereq, right? So someone needs to create a new CPAN ID, and release a module under that ID that prereqs all of CPAN. Then we'd all get our prereq points. Probably could be done with a Build.PL that pulls the full module list then constructs a massive requires hash. Unless CPANTS scans for dependencies, in which case you'd need to build the .pm file dynamically, too. And then run a cron job to rebuild/re-release with cpan-upload every so often to keep it fresh. David Michael Graham wrote: We should at least throw the poor module author's a bone and leave Acme:: out of this. Just as long as ACME keeps working for is_prereq, though! A bunch of us are planning ACME::CGI::Application::Kwalitee, which will exist solely to require all of the C::A plugins, so we can all get our 'is_prereq' point. Don't make us release this foolishness outside of ACME::! Michael --- Michael Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
> We should at least throw the poor module author's a bone and leave > Acme:: out of this. Just as long as ACME keeps working for is_prereq, though! A bunch of us are planning ACME::CGI::Application::Kwalitee, which will exist solely to require all of the C::A plugins, so we can all get our 'is_prereq' point. Don't make us release this foolishness outside of ACME::! Michael --- Michael Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 11:20:33PM +0200, Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat wrote: > Le jeudi 08 septembre 2005 à 10:45, Ovid écrivait: > Take a less random example: > > Acme::MetaSyntactic You've been learning this new definition of "random" from cog, haven't you? :-) [eg "random person to wear fishnet"] > > We should at least throw the poor module author's a bone and leave > > Acme:: out of this. > > Hey! that would decrease *my* score! ;-) I've no idea what it would do to my score. Nicholas Clark
Re: kwalitee: drop Acme?
Le jeudi 08 septembre 2005 à 10:45, Ovid écrivait: > > 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 Take a less random example: Acme::MetaSyntactic CPANTS Score: 17 > We should at least throw the poor module author's a bone and leave > Acme:: out of this. Hey! that would decrease *my* score! ;-) -- Philippe "BooK" Bruhat History is made by the winners and written by those with the loudest voices. (Moral from Groo The Wanderer #10 (Epic))
kwalitee: drop Acme?
--- 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): 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/
