The problem with that is that it's possible for the docs to be clear, seem complete, and describe friendly syntax... and be wrong
Which of course a doc review would not highlight. But normal testing and use would.
I'm not advocating POD review as a replacement for functional testing, but as a way to get more people involved in distribution QA in a way that is easier and more accessible than performing full blown testing, and getting a 'first pass' done on a wider range of modules.
After all, full testing on every module on CPAN is well nigh impossible, but if we could get a POD review on a wider range, that would be better than nothing.
In reply to Re^2: Perldocs and peer reviews
by g0n
in thread Perldocs and peer reviews
by g0n
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |