Hi Neil,

happy holidays.

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 23:05:03 +0000
Neil Bowers wrote:
At the London Perl Workshop I gave a talk on the CPAN River, and how
development and release practices should mature as a dist moves up river.
This was prompted by the discussions we had at Berlin earlier this year.

Writing the talk prompted a bunch of ideas, one of which is having a “water
quality” metric, which gives some indication of whether a dist is a good one
to rely on (needs a better name). I’ve come up with a first definition, and
calculated the metric for the different stages of the river:


Any thoughts on what factors should be included in such a metric? I think it
should really include factors that it would be hard for anyone to argue with.
Currently the individual factors are:

Not having too many CPAN Testers fails
Having a META.json or META.yml file
Specifying the min perl version required for the dist
I had put my thoughts about this in my CPAN Module-Rank document as part of the
Rethinking-CPAN initiative:



  Shlomi Fish

Shlomi Fish

There is an IGLU Cabal, but its only purpose is to deny the existence of an
IGLU Cabal.
     — Martha Greenberg

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 7 of 21 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupcpan-workers @
postedDec 22, '15 at 11:05p
activeJan 4, '16 at 9:39p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase