develooper Front page | perl.module-authors | Postings from June 2008

Re: Fwd: New CPANTS metrics

Thread Previous
Eric Roode
June 10, 2008 09:10
Re: Fwd: New CPANTS metrics
Message ID:
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Dave Rolsky <> wrote:
> Again, see above. These points codify existing community standards. The
> reason this is not much of a problem now in 2008 is probably because these
> standards have become so ingrained, both in terms of spreading the word, and
> in terms of making sure everyone is using standard tools that do the right
> thing (using EUMM, MI, or MB instead of hand-rolled Makefiles, for example).
> For the few cases where this isn't the case, having this codified may
> provide some useful feedback for module authors or potential end users.

Yes... I can see this.


>> uses it?   Some of my modules are very useful for end-users' code, not
>> so much for module developers' code.  So I get dinged for this?
> I think you're misinterpreting the meaning of the scores. You're not
> "getting dinged". You _are_ rewarded if your code is considered good enough
> to be required by something else. In other words, the point is a reward, but
> the lack of a point is not a punishment.

It is when modules and authors are ranked by this score.  That fosters
the perception that these are meaningful metrics and that a high
"purity" score is desirable.

-- Eric

Thread Previous Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About