in reply to Re: But isn't that my point?
in thread The quantity vs. quality lesson

Hell - I'm not talking about "killing" anybody. I'm simply talking about raising the bar a litle bit. And it may be even sufficient, that there IS a rating on CPAN and if that is prominently visible.

Unfortunatedly when I looked today at the rating pages, I saw:

The comment for Geo::Shapelib from Jive Chang. Gosh!... I even agree with your calculation to some point, but there are also mathematical models, that clearly show, that a too low Signal:Noise ratio will kill the signal.

So from a certain ratio on, the bad modules DO harm to the good ones, because you have to find out and can become very frustrated during this process, probably turning your back on CPAN. I'm not talking about me, but about people who heard Perl is great and would like to do some project in it and would like to build it on top of some CPAN modules.

Bye
 PetaMem
    All Perl:   MT, NLP, NLU

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: But isn't that my point?
by eserte (Deacon) on Jun 02, 2004 at 09:49 UTC
    Unfortunatedly when I looked today at the rating pages, I saw: The comment for Geo::Shapelib from Jive Chang. Gosh!... I even agree with your calculation to some point, but there are also mathematical models, that clearly show, that a too low Signal:Noise ratio will kill the signal.
    I am a regular reader of cpanratings, and while there are some unuseful ratings and some ratings which I wished I could rate themself, the majority of the ratings is quite useful and informative.