"David Golden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > 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!
Nice summary. I fully agree. Thanks. Steffen -- Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Dresden Perl Mongers <http://dresden-pm.org/> German Perl-Workshop <http://www.perl-workshop.de/>
