On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:02 PM, Barbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Instead of announcing some of those changes and improvements, I feel > completely deflated and very unimpressed at effectively beaten up for > trying to make a difference. I take it personally because I put in > several years to try and encourage people to get involve, contribute > ideas for improving CPAN Testers, and generally make it something of > value to everyone. I just hope the likes of David, Ricardo, Chris and > David don't get as deflated as I do right now.
Personally, I'm feeling energized. I'd rather have a good debate on the merits than either silence or irrelevant criticism. What's clear to me now is that we unintentionally antagonize a bunch of constituents who are generally among the most passionate people about quality and the value of tests. If they don't see CPAN Testers as helping with quality, then we should learn why and address it. While the email threads have been huge these last two days, I took away a whole new perspective on how we can be more helpful while staying true to the core of the CPAN Testers mission. Mostly, I heard things along the lines of "CPAN Testers is valuable, but not in the way it works for me today". Moreover, look what else came out of the discussion as side effects: * CPANPLUS::YACSmoke patched to squelch broken CPANPLUS/Build.PL situations * CPAN.pm patched to workaround old/broken tar programs that can't handle extended headers * CPAN.pm patched to avoid sending reports when Makefile.PL is generated by CPAN So as far as I can tell, things are working well. Smart people debate -- interesting things emerge -- and we have new direction. People are excited about getting RSS feeds, which the new site will bring. The new site will direct people to the right place to ask questions. Please don't get demoralized -- this is progress! -- David
