Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris

Re: Reliable software OR Is CPAN the sacred cow

by davorg (Chancellor)
on Sep 15, 2006 at 12:33 UTC ( #573106=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Reliable software: SOLVED (was: Reliable software OR Is CPAN the sacred cow)

This result in people stop thinking critically about CPAN, they believe is't goodness because it IS goodness, and that's all.

I don't believe that this is an accurate summary of anyone's views on CPAN (or, at least, anyone who has looked seriously at CPAN).

There is a _lot_ of code on CPAN. A lot of it is of very high quality and very useful. Some of it isn't. I don't think that's a problem with CPAN however, I see the low barrier to entry for CPAN as a feature. The Perl community has, in recent years, set up side projects to CPAN which allow users to see the "quality" of CPAN modules (as discussed by other users or determined by automated tests) and to give them more information on which to base their decision on whether or not to use a particular CPAN module.

We all realise that there are problems with some CPAN modules. There are almost certainly still bugs to find in pretty much every CPAN module. When you find one of these problems, you have a choice. You can mutter vaguely about the problem (as you've been doing on this site for the last few days) or you can help the author of the module to fix the problem and thereby help make the module better. There are a number of ways that you can help:

  • Raise a bug report in RT (it would be nice if your bug included a failing test).
  • Review the module on CPAN Ratings
  • Annotate the POD to correct any error
  • Join the module's mailing list (if one exists) and explain the problem
  • Offer to fix the problem - provide a patch

This is open source software. Of course, you're free to use it (or not use it) as you wish. No-one is going to force you to contribute. But it would be really good if you could help out. You've made it clear recently that you're not happy with the quality of CPAN's email handling modules. But as far as I can see, you have done nothing to improve the situation. Yes, you say you've written your own implementation, but why haven't you released it? Or why haven't you contacted the Perl email project to offer your help? Or given them concrete examples of the way that their current modules fail? It's very easy to complain, but harder to do something constructive.

I don't believe that CPAN is a sacred cow. And I don't know anyone who does. I know that there's an awful lot of rubbish on CPAN. But I find rubbish there that I'd like to use then I don't waste time moaning about it, I do what I can to fix it. Why don't you do the same?


"The first rule of Perl club is you do not talk about Perl club."
-- Chip Salzenberg

  • Comment on Re: Reliable software OR Is CPAN the sacred cow

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://573106]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (1)
As of 2022-08-16 01:36 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found