At the London Perl Workshop I gave a talk on the CPAN River, and how development and release practices should mature as a dist moves up river. This was prompted by the discussions we had at Berlin earlier this year.
Writing the talk prompted a bunch of ideas, one of which is having a “water quality” metric, which gives some indication of whether a dist is a good one to rely on (needs a better name). I’ve come up with a first definition, and calculated the metric for the different stages of the river: http://neilb.org/2015/12/22/cpan-river-water-quality.html Any thoughts on what factors should be included in such a metric? I think it should really include factors that it would be hard for anyone to argue with. Currently the individual factors are: Not having too many CPAN Testers fails Having a META.json or META.yml file Specifying the min perl version required for the dist Cheers, Neil At some point I’ll share the slides from my talk, but slideshare doesn’t handle keynote presentations, and the exported powerpoint from keynote is broken (neither powerpoint nor slideshare can handle it!)
