Cpanratings etc - Re: Devel::CheckLib: Please try to break our code!

[Andy Armstrong]

On 20 Oct 2007, at 11:39, Andrew Black wrote:
>> That's why I don't like cpanrantings. Before you know it, your module
>> can be slated by someone who's missed the point, and there's no easy
>> editorial control or right of reply.
>
> Not being a module developer, I can't comment on details but I feel  
> that cpanrating  is trying to plug a need. But it might not be  
> plugging this need very well.
>
> There is a lot of good stuff on CPAN, a lot of moderate stuff and  
> some crap.  THere seems to be a need whereby less knowledgeable  
> people can download stuff with confidence that it is reasonably  
> well going to do what it sets out to do.
>
> Just noticed the added n in rantings :-)

I think it's fair to say that CPAN is on the verge of outgrowing the  
current search tools we have for it. Projects like Gabor's cpanforum  
tags[1] are interesting attempts to fix that. I often find Google -  
and specifically Perl-flavoured-Google[2] more effective than  
search.cpan.org. But I've been wandering around CPAN on a regular  
basis for years now and I still sometimes have to ask people whether  
they know of a module that does what I want being pretty sure it must  
exist but having failed to find it using the tools.

More specifically why does search.cpan.org have such a hard time with  
one word module names? Try finding CGI.pm - or as I did this week in  
response to Lyle's module - FCGI.pm. You'd think that typing FCGI  
into the search box would do the trick, right? Nope. FCGI.pm? Nope.  
FastCGI? Nope. It's effectively completely broken for that case.

[1] http://www.cpanforum.com/tags/
[2] http://google.com/coop/cse?cx=008709583689349882482%3Aw2_rnxeqmu0

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten