Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Steffen Mueller wrote: 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) It is the worst kwalitee metric there is. See http://www.mail- archive.com/module-authors@perl.org/msg02565.html -- Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
On 11/5/06, Steffen Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 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) Heh. I'm sure the module list maintainers will find that a fun increase in their workload. :-) Maybe it would make sense to get DSLIP added to the META.yml spec instead. Regards, David
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
Andy Lester schrieb: On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Steffen Mueller wrote: 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) It is the worst kwalitee metric there is. See http://www.mail-archive.com/module-authors@perl.org/msg02565.html Well, see http://www.mail-archive.com/module-authors@perl.org/msg02572.html I am not talking about 01... But of course, we can agree to disagree on this even for 03... Steffen
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
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.
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:26 PM, Steffen Mueller wrote: I am not talking about 01... But of course, we can agree to disagree on this even for 03... Either way, doesn't matter. It's an arbitrary distinction. Also, many module authors don't even bother submitting their modules to the list. Simon Cozens has over 100 modules, and has no modules on the list. That doesn't make his modules any less good. -- Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
David Golden schrieb: Maybe it would make sense to get DSLIP added to the META.yml spec instead. Andy and Schwern made a similar point. I agree with that. Also, I agree that the original idea perhaps wasn't great - except for the fact that the blessing of the modules list maintainers *is* great. (Nevermind the list itself!) Just because it catches the bad names people give their modules. Steffen
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
Andy Lester wrote: > > On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:26 PM, Steffen Mueller wrote: > >> I am not talking about 01... >> >> But of course, we can agree to disagree on this even for 03... > > Either way, doesn't matter. It's an arbitrary distinction. Also, many > module authors don't even bother submitting their modules to the list. > Simon Cozens has over 100 modules, and has no modules on the list. That > doesn't make his modules any less good. Some of my worst modules are registered on the modules list because they're some of the first I wrote and I quickly stopped bothering to register. For example, Tree::Base, Tree::Smart, Text::Metaphone and Class::Fields.
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
Steffen Mueller wrote: > David Golden schrieb: >> Maybe it would make sense to get DSLIP added to the META.yml spec >> instead. > > Andy and Schwern made a similar point. I agree with that. Harvesting ideas from DSLIP, not just plunking it into META.yml. As implemented its not very useful. > Also, I agree that the original idea perhaps wasn't great - except for > the fact that the blessing of the modules list maintainers *is* great. > (Nevermind the list itself!) Just because it catches the bad names > people give their modules. While discussing your module name is useful, I don't agree that having a blessing by a particular fiat is great or important.
Re: CPANTS Metric: Module list?
On Nov 5, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote: While discussing your module name is useful, I don't agree that having a blessing by a particular fiat is great or important. Or that finally having it blessed adds kwalitee, unlike adding other kwalitee metrics. -- Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
