comment on

Fellow Tanktalus wrote:

As for using Perlmonks Discussion as a place for discussing modules - that seems wrong to me, too. This is about discussing perlmonks, not modules (that's what SoPW is for). Which, I suppose, makes this particular thread on-topic here, but what the thread is about would not be on-topic here, IMO.

Dear fellow, I beg your pardon. I don't make myself clear as water at the first post.

I'm using PerlMonks Discussion to suggest a new Category, which name could be Module Parliament, the place where issues like module architecture and adoption of orphaned modules could take place publically, inside PerlMonks (that is a well-advertised, well-known forum for Perl and Community-related discussions).

Hope that now my point is clear like the water from the Monastery fountain.

Peace and Glory

-- monsieur_champs

In reply to Re^2: A room for CPAN Modules discussion? by monsieur_champs
in thread A room for CPAN Modules discussion? by monsieur_champs

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.