in reply to Re: A reply.
in thread Why I won't be contributing to the 'CPAN rating system'; and why you don't want me to.
It seems your stance on the existence of a rating system has change somewhat from your initial statement.
No. I would support a rating system that had some merit; the existing one which I was unaware of at the time, does not.
If your point is that my suggestion of 1..5 is effectively the same as 5 stars, you are correct. My throw away suggestion for a possible rating system that I "knew would never be implemented", was ill thought through and inadequate; as testified by my analysis of the existing system.
Does that mean I don't think a rating system is a good idea. No.
It means that neither the existing system nor my off-the-cuff suggestion are worthy.
I'm not here to try to convince you of anything.
You've expended a lot of posts not trying to convince me of anything.
I find that more often that not module authors/developers welcome patches/pull requests to fix bugs or otherwise improve software.
That is a completely different subject.
A rating system is -- should be -- to allow users to inform other users of their experiences; and perhaps allow those other users to avoid repeating their mistake of -- for example -- building their design around a module that will ultimately come back to bite them in their arse.
Most of the modules I reject for my own use, that rejection takes a matter of minutes and happens before I even download it. It is a quick, gut driven appraisal to cut down the list; and is entirely inadequate for any kind of review or rating. I'm certainly not going to download and provide patches to correct all the modules I reject from consideration.
The few modules on CPAN that I have -- what I consider -- sound and researched grounds for not just rejecting for my own use; but of sufficient strength and conviction to consider recommending against to others; are frequently modules that many others seem to find to be the best thing since sliced bread.
My patches for Moose, Perlcritic, Readonly, PDL, Bignum, Lingua::Perlegata, Quantum::Superpositions, Acme::*; Modern::Perl, Common::Sense and probably 90% of CPAN on a gut-feel basis of those I've looked at, would be an empty archive.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^3: A reply.
by marto (Cardinal) on Aug 08, 2016 at 10:10 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 08, 2016 at 10:27 UTC | |
by marto (Cardinal) on Aug 08, 2016 at 10:39 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 08, 2016 at 10:58 UTC |