On Monday 27 October 2008 10:45:46 Salve J Nilsen wrote: > > Remember, this is not a project designed only to say "This code sucks." > > Its intent is to encourage people to improve their code. My code doesn't > > magically get better when someone finds a bug. It magically gets better > > when someone *fixes* a bug. > > One is a prerequisite of the other. You have to have some indication that a > bug exists before you can fix it (let's ignore "accidental bugfixes" for > now.) So unless you live in a bubble all by yourself, this list will at the > very least increase the likelyhood of you learning about (in this case > Kwalitee) bugs.
A public hall of shame that several people on the Perl-QA mailing list did not know about has a very marginal effect on increasing the likelihood of learning about a problem. I'm not a statistician, so I can confidently say that the chance of that occurring is non-zero. (Randomly stumbling across several billion web pages will *eventually* get you there.) > This is a good thing. Especially if the scale we're measuring the code is > sensible, well thought out and relevant. If your ego gets a bruising, too > bad. The code Kwalitee is more important. Heaping random, unsolicited, and public abuse on contributors is a fantastic way to make sure there are no Kwalitee programs -- in the sense that abusing contributors is a great way to make sure that there are no more contributors. -- c
