Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things

Re: Dealing with CPAN reviews

by Anonymous Monk
on Aug 21, 2009 at 06:48 UTC ( [id://790254] : note . print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Dealing with CPAN reviews

As I've never written a CPAN module I cannot give you any advice on the "process", however, as a recent convert to perl and an avid supporter I'd like to offer my experience as a CPAN hunter....

If I search for a module the MOST important thing in determining between two modules is the last update / version. The one with the latest updates usually gets the first try. Call me fickle, but there is something that draws me towards actively maintained modules.

Also, as I tend to code for Winblows so having an Activestate PPMx clinches it for me.

Hope this helps.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Dealing with CPAN reviews
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 21, 2009 at 07:25 UTC
    I agree with Anonymous monk, if theres a PPM included I'll usually give it a very good try - even it that means it has a few teething problems getting it to do what I want. And I also look at a modules release history.

    I think its a bit unfortunate that the CPAN rating system hasn't had the usage it was meant to get. I'd say of all the people using CPAN modules, less than 1% of them have made a review on a module. As a result, I usually find myself trolling the monestary when I'm looking for reviews and commments on a module.

    @aayars > stick with it, true genius often gets critised unfairly...
Re^2: Dealing with CPAN reviews
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 21, 2009 at 17:28 UTC

    So one should release an update every few months consisting of a change to Changes:

    2009-08-21 — Still works find

    Seriously though, a module that has gone through numerous updates even if none of them are particularly recent is also a good sign.