I have a prototype Perl script that will determine the dependencies of a given
CPAN distribution, and then check CPAN Testers for any failure reports of that
distro or dependent distros for a given platform.
I would like to work with other people to turn this into something of use to
the
On 7/18/2004 5:14 AM Smylers wrote:
[...]
Rather than the dependent app (or module) having a list alternatives
that are known to work, it could instead depend on some 'abstract'
package. Other distros are then able to say that they 'provide' that
abstract package. So if another module is
So, if I want to write a review of Net::SMTP, I'd do the following.
1. Use Module::Build, or ExtUtils::MakeMaker to create
Review::Net::SMTP::CHRISJ, or whatever.
2. Make sure I have my README.txt, CHANGES, and MANIFEST file.
3. Write my review in POD format, and throw in some META.yml indexing
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (A. Pagaltzis) writes:
* Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-06-16 21:24]:
Well, I guess to run a patched version of search.cpan.org on
your local system you need to start by running an unpatched
version of search.cpan.org. I'm not sure whether the source to
it is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Khemir Nadim) writes:
- We have troubles finding out who is holding onto the code, were it
is and how to change it.
Which site are you talking about then? Surely it can't be
http://cpanratings.perl.org. If you click on a random link in the
menu bar (there are 3) you have a
On Jul 20, 2004, at 11:57 AM, Chris Josephes wrote:
So, if I want to write a review of Net::SMTP, I'd do the following.
1. Use Module::Build, or ExtUtils::MakeMaker to create
Review::Net::SMTP::CHRISJ, or whatever.
2. Make sure I have my README.txt, CHANGES, and MANIFEST file.
3. Write my review
# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Randy W. Sims
# on Thursday 22 July 2004 04:50 pm:
Ask posted with information about where to find the source for CPAN
Ratings,
But, most of the interface improvements (IMO) need to be done to
search.cpan.org.
I found
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:50:37 -0500, Ken Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was sort of hoping this idea would just die on its own, but now it
looks like people are actually getting ready to do it. In my opinion
this is a bad idea. I don't want a bunch of reviews all over CPAN
disguising
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Ken Williams wrote:
I was sort of hoping this idea would just die on its own, but now it
looks like people are actually getting ready to do it. In my opinion
this is a bad idea. I don't want a bunch of reviews all over CPAN
disguising themselves as modules. I also
Eric Wilhelm [EMAIL PROTECTED] quoth:
*
*ok, now we see the ratings, click-through to get reviews...
* http://cpanratings.perl.org/d/CGI.pm
*
*Or do we? I get a 404. Not much use.
Well, that's an error and one you should take up with the people who run
the rantings pages at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
Okay, but we have requirements for both search.cpan.org and
cpanratings.perl.org, right?
Yes. cpanratings could display more in depth statistics of the various
modules and also allow for being to view a module as a whole and not just
one particular
On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 03:26:56PM -0500, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
*Finally, here we are at a page with reviews. Frankly, I've never seen one of
*these before, and I can't say that this one really does me a huge amount of
*good. I'm much better served by reading the documentation (which
On Thu, 22 Jul 2004, Randy W. Sims wrote:
Agreed. Reviews as modules is not the best solution. CPAN does one thing
and does it well. Adding reviews as modules is likely to cause more
problems that it solves.
Do we really need reviews ? I am afraid not many people will take the
time to do a
On Fri, 23 Jul 2004, Gabor Szabo wrote:
Do we really need reviews ?
Short of some better sort of solution for helping guide people to the
better choices of modules.
I am afraid not many people will take the time to do a deep analyzis of
a module.
It doesn't take many people to provide a
* Austin Schutz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2004-07-23 01:03]:
That said, perhaps it would be useful to have a set of
standard sort of comments that could be applied to the
module, such as some tests don't seem to pass or requires
compilation on the target platform, module shares similar
functionality
On 7/22/2004 5:50 PM, Randy W. Sims wrote:
We just need to organize and do it.
1st crack at organizing ideas/suggestions made in this thread and in
Ask's TODO list. Comments/Omissions?
Also available at http://www.thepierianspring.org/perl/cpan-ratings.notes
--
I) CPAN Ratings
A) Abuse
# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Randy W. Sims
# on Thursday 22 July 2004 07:56 pm:
Comments/Omissions
I) CPAN Ratings
B) All Reviews Pages (per module):
1) Header with average rating and other summary information.
duplicate this in III.B.2
III) Search CPAN:
A) make
# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Randy W. Sims
# on Thursday 22 July 2004 07:56 pm:
A) Abuse
Authors abusing the system for political statements, to sabatoge
authors of similars modules, etc.
1) The usuall solution is a Karma type system. Number of reviews
On 7/22/2004 11:41 PM, Eric Wilhelm wrote:
# The following was supposedly scribed by
# Randy W. Sims
# on Thursday 22 July 2004 07:56 pm:
A) Abuse
Authors abusing the system for political statements, to sabatoge
authors of similars modules, etc.
1) The usuall solution is a Karma
19 matches
Mail list logo
