Front page | perl.module-authors |
Postings from November 2011
Re: The CPAN Covenant
From: Linda W
November 24, 2011 08:09
Re: The CPAN Covenant
Message ID: 4ECE6C3F.firstname.lastname@example.org
Steffen Mueller wrote:
> On 11/21/2011 09:58 AM, Neil Bowers wrote:
>> Maybe instead of just this Covenant, we have a number of Ownership /
>> Maintenance statements, one of which is the one I proposed, but
>> another of which would something along the lines of:
If you put something on CPAN and don't answer email or fix things for 3
months it's too long to stay listed as a "maintained module"
CPAN is a cesspool of garbage right now and now its HARD to find
the jewels that ARE there, because of all the junk and false modules one
has to deal with that are seemingly more prevalent.
Don't have to touch their code,... but if we want CPAN to be able to
be relied upon.. it's can't have unaddressed bugs for months (let alone a
year or more)...
Otherwise, it's a museum for old code that used to work... not real
useful as it was originally intended.
The author should also be "open" to patches, if they don't want to give
it up but don't have time or resources (no, I don't have a VAX-native
version of Perl to duplicate your problem, let alone HW to run it on;
what time zone did you say you were in?).
Seems like CPAN is more about ego's the way this is being handled...
CPAN ain't the Prom, and the authors need to stop thinking their prom
queens (not that I am saying that's a majority attitude), but the idea
that you'd have to wait a year for something to begin to get fixed?...
That doesn't AT ALL begin to describe a useful, let alone functional
And yeah... i've been bitten and look like an idiot because I though a
cpan module that was used in various book examples, was near standard
(though it's not part of the base).... but now, someone almost called me
an idiot for relying on a CPAN module... (gee, you should have included
all your code... um I did, .. where's readonly? um. standard module
did you bother to check the bugdb? looks pretty unmaintained... take out
the usage of it.. and things work...
Oi! Another CPAN success story...
Maintaining SW is HARD, you shouldn't feel any entitlement to a reserved
name if you aren't going to stay around and support it. IT defeats the
purpose of CPAN (and I don't think a voluntary form should be necessary...
It should be *standard* policy, that unmaintained modules can be removed
from listings and re-assigned...there should be a good process in place to
not cause false positive 'kicks', but once that's in place, (with stages
of migration...so someone, if they want to, can post a patch or
such...)... Make sure the source control is easily review-able and
But saw this discussion, and having been bitten by unmaintained SW --
including, I don't want to see some standard policy catering to whiners
put in place -- and I wouldn't feel comfortable signing a donation
statement -- but I wouldn't not post if automatic policies were in place --
I would EXPECT such policies to be in place... (if you don't maintain for
'N' months...or...whatever...). I'd have to think about exact details
alot... as I've never posted code because I didn't feel I could maintain
it! .. so I'm at the end of the scale that is too anal retentive and never
finishing... So I may not be the best to come up with something to
please everyone (in fact it's usually the opposite, despite the fact
that usually after a bit of time has passed, someone else will propose
exactly what I proposed, and it will get implemented...
I just set people against whatever I say, even if it is right... (people
are so easily manipulated in to acting against their best interests...