CPAN is the public side of Perl. If my manager finds out that a certain module I'm depending on is not up to scratch, he'll mumble something about J2EE. While kwalitee is a fine idea, what we really want is quality. I want code on CPAN to be good the moment it is uploaded and made public, not twenty revisions down the line.
Of course, we can't change CPAN. We fear change. Change may make it wither and die.
So what can we do? I say we use the following argument:
Yes, I love CPAN really. And no, the act of sending bug reports can not be considered "Art"
Art? (Score:1)
Do you remember going around Amsterdam at YAPC::Europe::2001, seeing all these weird statues in the street. IIRC the conversation went something like this:
I could draw comparisons to CPAN. CPAN does have very cool stuff that can make water seem like it's running uphill, but it also has stuff that keeps making you walk off the side of the path too.
I'm sure I had a poin
*sigh* (Score:2)
CPAN is an archive, nothing more. If it were for the benefit of corporations it would have an 'E' in there somewhere like "The Comprehensive Enterprise-ready Perl Archive Network".
This doesn't prevent someone from making their own archive of enterprise-ready modules, however this would take a lot of work. With the current upload rate of ~15 modules a day on average, it would take at least one person doing review 40+ hours a week.
Also, I hear there are some who believe in Open Source but want bugs to be
Re:*sigh* (Score:1)
Anyway I think the point acme was trying to make is that CPAN is different and odd and good and all of these things at once, and judging it just a from a buisness perspective is a really silly thing to do. Maybe it is all art! Maybe people do just do it becau
Re:*sigh* (Score:2)
You misunderstand. I want it in the Perl core. You know it makes sense!