Hi!
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 09:42:21PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Thomas Klausner wrote in perl.qa :
> >
> > Well, here's a list of lowercase dist on CPAN (238 dists). Quite a lot of
> > those are in fact real distributions (eg. perl, parrot). In fact I think
> > that perl itself should
At 23:20 +0200 10/17/03, Thomas Klausner wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:09:04PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Something I'd be curious about:
> Modules with lower case names which aren't pragmas.
> (although how you determine this is hard)
Well, here's a list of lowercase dist on CPAN (238
Thomas Klausner wrote in perl.qa :
>
> Well, here's a list of lowercase dist on CPAN (238 dists). Quite a lot of
> those are in fact real distributions (eg. perl, parrot). In fact I think
> that perl itself shouldn't be part of CPANTS
>
> I've no clue on how to figure out if something is a pragm
Hi!
On Fri, Oct 17, 2003 at 10:09:04PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Something I'd be curious about:
> Modules with lower case names which aren't pragmas.
>
> (although how you determine this is hard)
Well, here's a list of lowercase dist on CPAN (238 dists). Quite a lot of
those are in fact
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> Obviously, this list is far from complete, which is why I request some
> feedback on more hints for Kwalitee from all of you!
Something I'd be curious about:
Modules with lower case names which aren't pragmas.
(although how you
On 16 October 2003 05:47 Robert Spier wrote:
>> Yes. We've been thinking about this. It either needs stealing buildd
>> from Debian, having a box we don't mind destroying every so often, or
>> having a VMware virtual machine we can undo easily. What we need is
>> more free time ;-)
>>
>
> User
> Yes. We've been thinking about this. It either needs stealing buildd
> from Debian, having a box we don't mind destroying every so often, or
> having a VMware virtual machine we can undo easily. What we need is
> more free time ;-)
>
User Mode Linux (limiting to Linux, of course) might be a lig
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 10:34:19PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Michael G Schwern wrote in perl.qa :
> > This all suggests another check: stray files. Emacs backup files. CVS
> > directories. Empty directories. #...# backup files. Makefiles shipped
> > with Makefile.PL, Build and _buil
Michael G Schwern wrote in perl.qa :
> This all suggests another check: stray files. Emacs backup files. CVS
> directories. Empty directories. #...# backup files. Makefiles shipped
> with Makefile.PL, Build and _build shipped with Build.PL, blib/...
In other words, the contents of the default
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 11:53:45AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > configure?
>
> there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script
> (makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3)
configure's an alien idiom on CPAN. If its found, I think it should be
eval
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 12:09:05PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script
> > (makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3)
> >
> > 179 do not include any of Makefile.PL, Build.PL or c
Hi!
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 03:24:22PM +0100, Leon Brocard wrote:
> Thomas Klausner sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > OTOH, it might be an interesting idea to allow CPANTS to compile code (and
> > thus use stuff like Devel::Cover) if not testing the whole of CPAN, but
> > "linting"
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 02:10:46PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Could we infer that a distribution that comes with several Makefile.PLs
> > >may have an overcomplicated build process, maybe indicating a low
> > >kwalitee ?
> >
> > Should I i
Rafael Garcia-Suarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Could we infer that a distribution that comes with several Makefile.PLs
>> >may have an overcomplicated build process, maybe indicating a low
>> >kwalitee ?
>>
>> Should I infer that to get Tk's kwali
Thomas Klausner sent the following bits through the ether:
> OTOH, it might be an interesting idea to allow CPANTS to compile code (and
> thus use stuff like Devel::Cover) if not testing the whole of CPAN, but
> "linting" one distribution.
Yes. We've been thinking about this. It either needs stea
On Wednesday, Oct 15, 2003, at 11:09 Europe/London, Rafael
Garcia-Suarez wrote:
Thomas Klausner wrote:
there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure
script
(makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3)
179 do not include any of Makefile.PL, Build.PL or configu
Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Could we infer that a distribution that comes with several Makefile.PLs
> >may have an overcomplicated build process, maybe indicating a low
> >kwalitee ?
>
> Should I infer that to get Tk's kwalitee up it should build as a
> one monolithic .so ?
I
Rafael Garcia-Suarez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Thomas Klausner wrote:
>> there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script
>> (makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3)
>>
>> 179 do not include any of Makefile.PL, Build.PL or configure.
>>
>> Quite a l
On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 12:03:58PM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 05:53:15PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> > use Pod::Coverage ?
>
> As far as I know, Pod::Coverage compiles the module, which makes it not
> suitable for CPANTS.
Afraid so. It's an eventual TODO-lis
Thomas Klausner wrote:
> there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script
> (makepp-1.19, glist-0.9.17a10, swig1.1p5, shufflestat-0.0.3)
>
> 179 do not include any of Makefile.PL, Build.PL or configure.
>
> Quite a lot come with two or three of those files.
Could we infe
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 05:53:15PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> > * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?)
>
> use Pod::Coverage ?
As far as I know, Pod::Coverage compiles the module, which makes it not
suitable for CPANTS.
OTOH, it might be an interesting idea to allow
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 07:46:02PM +0200, Tels wrote:
> > * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?)
>
> No. Some _very_ complex code takes little documentation like:
Agreed.
> Probably something like:
>
> *.pm file has more than 1000 lines of code => bad
>
> :-)
CPANTS
Hi!
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 02:57:34AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > * contains files:
> > * Makefile.PL or Build.PL or configure
>
> configure?
there are currently 4 dists on CPAN that only include a configure script
(m
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 01:14:44PM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Of course, if you have a well-written name/synopsis/author info,
> I guess this is enough. But now we've just shifted the problem.
Well when I initially thought about it I was answering the needs of
someone who wanted to know:
> "Richard" == Richard Clamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Richard> It pulls out the name, synopsis and author info from the main module,
Richard> mixes in the dependencies from META.yml, and then sprinkles on the
Richard> last few entries from Changes for good measure.
I'm not even sure that t
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 11:49:44AM -0400, Darren Chamberlain wrote:
> I'll concede that they are useless duplication if someone simply does:
>
> perldoc -t Module.pm > README
I find them to be useful duplication, but I truly hate doing that
myself, so this is what I use:
http://unixbeard.net/
* Michael G Schwern [2003-10-14 08:27]:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > * README
>
> Personally, I find READMEs useless duplication. Even more so now that
> search.cpan.org works so well.
I'll concede that they are useless duplication if someone simply d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Monday 13 October 2003 10:28, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> Hi!
> * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?)
No. Some _very_ complex code takes little documentation like:
=head2 sub delete_first_n_entries($N)
Deletes the first N
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 06:51:43PM +0200, Tels wrote:
> > > * t/* or test.pl
> >
> > test.pl is not a good thing. It doesn't get parsed by "make test". It
> > just runs and spits the output to the screen. If a test fails, "make test"
> > will still succeed. Still, its better than nothing at a
Thomas Klausner wrote in perl.qa :
>
> Hints that were in Leon's last release, but which I didn't port up to now:
> * POD errors
> * POD/Code ratio (what would be a good measurement?)
use Pod::Coverage ?
> * testers results
> * number of releases
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Monday 13 October 2003 11:57, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> > * contains files:
> > * Makefile.PL or Build.PL or configure
>
> configure?
>
> > * README
>
> Personally, I find READMEs u
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 10:28:29AM +0200, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> * contains files:
> * Makefile.PL or Build.PL or configure
configure?
> * README
Personally, I find READMEs useless duplication. Even more so now that
search.cpan.org works so well.
> * t/* or test.pl
test.pl is not a go
32 matches
Mail list logo
