develooper Front page | | Postings from June 2008

Re: About tidying up Kwalitee metrics

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Nicholas Clark
June 25, 2008 03:47
Re: About tidying up Kwalitee metrics
Message ID:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 10:10:07AM +0200, Salve J Nilsen wrote:
> Hello, folks
> I propose to split the current "main" and "optional" kwalitee scales into 
> topical ones, so we can allow for richer set of metrics while allowing 
> everyone that care mostly about certain types of metric access to 
> "untainted" versions.
> Let's remove the "optional" type, and instead create the following metrics 
> where we can place the existing tests:
> Disto Kwalitee
>  (most of the original test should go here)
> Security Kwalitee
>  (checks for taint-mode or other security-related issues go here)
> Community Support Kwalitee
>  (checks for supplied mailing list address, bugtracker, archives, etc. go 
>  here)
> Community Trust Kwalitee
>  (analysis of external acceptance of the module, including Debian use go 
>  here)
> Thoughts?

Certainly, I would like the metrics to be split into those I can control by
what I upload to PAUSE, and those that I can't "fix" however much I upload.
Which I think most obviously is those that you group here as
"Community Trust Kwalitee".

The previous 2 seem good, as they are likely to be categories that some
people have legitimate disagreements with. ie I've not been paying close
attention to CPANTS, but if I did, I suspect that it would annoy me that
it expects me to have a POD coverage test, and that in turn to make it pass
I could well spend more time bodging that than actually writing
documentation. Which, I agree with chromatic, would be stupid, and not
something that I'd like to see promoted.

(Is "You have POD and it's well formed" is something that is already tested?)

Nicholas Clark

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