Cpanratings etc - Re: Devel::CheckLib: Please try to break our code!
n at rciss.us
Sat Oct 20 11:52:42 BST 2007
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 are interesting attempts to fix that. I often find Google -
and specifically Perl-flavoured-Google 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.
Andy Armstrong, Hexten
More information about the london.pm