On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:10:07AM +0200, Salve J Nilsen wrote: > Hello, folks > > I propose to split the current "main" and "optional" kwalitee scales into > topical ones, so we can allow for richer set of metrics while allowing > everyone that care mostly about certain types of metric access to > "untainted" versions. > > Let's remove the "optional" type, and instead create the following metrics > where we can place the existing tests: > > Disto Kwalitee > (most of the original test should go here) > Security Kwalitee > (checks for taint-mode or other security-related issues go here) > Community Support Kwalitee > (checks for supplied mailing list address, bugtracker, archives, etc. go > here) > Community Trust Kwalitee > (analysis of external acceptance of the module, including Debian use go > here) > > Thoughts?
Certainly, I would like the metrics to be split into those I can control by what I upload to PAUSE, and those that I can't "fix" however much I upload. Which I think most obviously is those that you group here as "Community Trust Kwalitee". The previous 2 seem good, as they are likely to be categories that some people have legitimate disagreements with. ie I've not been paying close attention to CPANTS, but if I did, I suspect that it would annoy me that it expects me to have a POD coverage test, and that in turn to make it pass I could well spend more time bodging that than actually writing documentation. Which, I agree with chromatic, would be stupid, and not something that I'd like to see promoted. (Is "You have POD and it's well formed" is something that is already tested?) Nicholas Clark
