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

Re: CPANTS has_test_pod* metrics

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Hans Dieter Pearcey
Date:
June 11, 2008 03:17
Subject:
Re: CPANTS has_test_pod* metrics
Message ID:
20080610185405.GA9987@glaive.weftsoar.net
On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 02:33:13PM -0400, Ricardo SIGNES wrote:
> I think that a lot of the tests could do with a shift in mindset.  Instead of
> has_test_pod_coverage, maybe known_pod_coverage_tool, or even
> asserts_pod_covered.  Make it clear that the test is for, "the author has
> attempted to let us know that he has documented everything," not "the author
> uses a specific tool to do this job."

I wonder if it is worth having some set of metrics that CPANTS trusts META.yml
for:

  kwalitee:
    pod_covered: 1
    use_strict: 1
    author_is_friendly: 1

(I threw strict in there on a whim because of Moose and other things that
import strict and warnings for you; I don't actually think it's in the same
category as pod_covered.)

Of course, this is easy to game, but it's not like the current system is
difficult to fool, and worrying too much about that leads to this question: is
the purpose of CPANTS to keep authors in line, or to point out ways to improve
their distributions?

hdp.

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About