Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I'm looking for a solution to this problem, but haven't found one yet. Simply adding the number of dists to the rating would distort the stats in favour of people with many dists. So I/we need to come up aith a way so that adding a new dist doesn't lower ones rating. Ideas welcome!
    • Well, what's the kwalitee score used for?

      If it's used to determine the kwalitee of a module, it's useful to know whether someone else uses the module (actually, more interesting than some other stats).

      But the kwalitee of an author? That's just weird and not very useful except as a second-order measure of whether a module is good. So that number isn't very useful anyway, except as a vanity thing.

      Either you remove it altogether since people tend to misuse it.

      Or you game the number so that it steers behaviour
    • Engage the prereq rule only after the module has been released for a year? (Yes, this would mean that the CPANTS rating should probably by a percentage instead of an integer.)
  • Just how Sartre's character said. I think the is_prereq rule tests whether the exercise of laziness/patience/hubris of a Perl programmer was successful to reach the world. What is good for if nobody saw all your care to not be bothered for features people would want (anticipating them with your laziness), all the patience to write docs and flawless code, and the fine tuning to assure your hubris. I think there's nothing wrong with this CPANTS rule which at least gives a (possibly distorted) acknowledge of t