cpan you have to see

[DAVID HODGKINSON]

On 12 Dec 2012, at 18:35, Abigail <abigail at abigail.be> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 10:57:39AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> On 12/12/2012 07:12 AM, Leon Brocard wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 02:29:24AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
>>>> i can't say much about this but you have to look at the code here.
>>>> 
>>>> https://metacpan.org/author/PERLOOK/
>>> 
>>> I congratulate Alexej on joining the CPAN authors club. Instead of making fun
>>> of him on a mailing list why not engage with him and help him improve?
>> 
>> look at his early rt ticket replies. and i did engage him and admonish  
>> his attitude. his reply was more normal but he still thinks his code is  
>> doing something useful and even correct. i will point him in better  
>> directions later today.
>> 
>> but he should be learning basic perl on his own box and wait for  
>> publishing until he has something to show. what is up there is very  
>> broken ('#' is false in his world) and he doesn't know it.
> 
> 
> The power of CPAN is that it is available to *ALL*.
> 
> Noone is forcing you to use what's there. If you think it's crappy, don't
> use it. If it pisses you off people prefer to use a module that you think
> is crappy, write something better. After all, most people just want to 
> fix a problem, and they don't (usually rightly) how it's solved.
> 
> If only code that is approved by a cabal is allowed on CPAN, it will
> quickly become something else then it's now. 

Do we still have automated kwalitee on CPAN? 

Would hurling a PBP test at the whole of CPAN to get a metric be of any benefit?