On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 12:02:17PM +0200, khemir nadim wrote:
Now, I'm asking for someone else to do the job (I don't even know who he is)
but I'd gladely help if I can, I'd definitively rate more.
Which means that it won't get done.
All volunteer organisations work in roughly the same way -
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 12:05:02PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
All volunteer organisations work in roughly the same way - if you want to
get a job done, you have to *start* it yourself. Others may well join in
and help once they see that it's a good idea, but things don't get started
because
Amen.
Today that work is left to the module writer, setup a web site, setup a
mailling list etc ...
I once wrote that it would be great to have the equivalent of sourceforge
for perl module, the answer I got was use sourceforge. Hmm talk about not
answering the question. The most disturbing
Michael Peppler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personally I think the current rating system should be enough - only not
enough people use it (for example my modules have only one or two
ratings, yet they are used by a lot of people, and have been for many
years).
I
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 01:17:51PM +0200, Michael Peppler wrote:
Why don't you start by rating those modules that you feel are horribly
lacking with 0 stars?
Part of the issue here is that cpanratings.perl.org doesn't expose the
individual component ratings (Documentation, Interface,
Title: RE: CPAN Rating
Personally I think the current rating system should be enough
- only not enough people use it (for example my modules have
only one or two ratings, yet they are used by a lot of
people, and have been for many years).
Well, personally ive never rated your module
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Khemir Nadim) writes:
But I can't live anymore with the low quality and release process that CPAN
has!!!
*sigh*. Is it that time of year again?
We have this discussion every six months or so. Everyone talks about it.
Nobody does anything about it. Nothing gets done. Goto 1.
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
If you do stick with this name, I'd suggest suspended, as
suspension sounds weird. (I'm not sure this is a particularly
strong reason for anything, but hey.)
Thanks for your reply! I can live with Sub::Suspended. However,
'suspension' isn't uncommon (see the links below).
On Wed, 2004-06-16 at 16:29, Orton, Yves wrote:
Personally I think the current rating system should be enough
- only not enough people use it (for example my modules have
only one or two ratings, yet they are used by a lot of
people, and have been for many years).
Well, personally
Title: RE: CPAN Rating
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Khemir Nadim) writes:
But I can't live anymore with the low quality and release
process that
CPAN has!!!
*sigh*. Is it that time of year again?
We have this discussion every six months or so. Everyone
talks about it. Nobody does
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:19:26PM +0100, Orton, Yves ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I think part of the problem is that those with a desire to do something
about it are not really in the position to do so.
What do I have to patch to change search.cpan.org, or who has to agree to
changes to CPAN
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004, Mark Stosberg wrote:
Another perspective: I do see signs that the current rating system is
helping. After receiving several negative ratings, CGI::NeedSSL has been
pulled from CPAN.
What was the deal with this? I never used the module, I was just curious
about what
* Andy Lester andy at petdance.com [2004/06/16 10:24]:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 04:19:26PM +0100, Orton, Yves ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
I think part of the problem is that those with a desire to do
something about it are not really in the position to do so.
What do I have to patch to
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 11:41:12AM -0400, darren chamberlain wrote:
I didn't read that as concern about permission. I've also contemplated
duplicating or extending some of the functionality of search.cpan.org
for internal CPAN mirrors, but I don't want to reimplement *everything*,
just add
Eric Wilhelm wrote:
[ snip ]
--Eric
--
Because understanding simplicity is complicated.
--Eric Raymond
That's the point!!!
Well, I need some funcionality, go to CPAN, browse by category, download
the best choice(s), and that's all! I don't bother
On Wed, Jun 16, 2004 at 06:39:22PM -0300, SilvioCVdeAlmeida wrote:
Let's write it better:
1. FORBID any module without a meaningful readme with all its (possibly
recursive) dependencies, its pod and any other relevant information
inside.
Having the dependencies easily visible is a good idea
# The following was supposedly scribed by
# SilvioCVdeAlmeida
# on Wednesday 16 June 2004 04:39 pm:
FORBID any module without a meaningful readme with all its (possibly
recursive) dependencies, its pod and any other relevant information
inside.
I don't think it is in the spirit of CPAN to FORBID
On Jun 16, 2004, at 4:39 PM, SilvioCVdeAlmeida wrote:
SilvioCVdeAlmeida wrote:
Two ideas: 1. forbid a module without a meaningful readme, with
dependencies and its pod. 2. branch a last-version-only
CPAN_modules_by_category.
Let's write it better:
1. FORBID any module without a meaningful readme
18 matches
Mail list logo
