Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
laziness, impatience, and hubris

Re: Re: The quantity vs. quality lesson

by PetaMem (Priest)
on Jun 02, 2004 at 07:23 UTC ( #359241=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re: The quantity vs. quality lesson
in thread The quantity vs. quality lesson

Clearly the removal of old modules is the biggest challenge. It is a well known fact, that a big portion of the software and hardware industry has to cope with "Legacy" CPAN and Perl are no exceptions.
I see several prerequisites for that to be able to happen for every individual module:

  • The module must be OIR (old, infrequent, replaceable), that is: last update n years ago, maintainer has no time, not used often, another - better - module exists and there is a migration path. old2new, which the author of the new one provides (as sign of maintenance commitment). That was for old and replaceable. As for "infrequent" I *do*think, that quite raw download statistics do provide a hint. Yes I have read the statement in the FAQ, I have read the website, and i *do* think that this is the sort of pseudo-academic talk that can make every idea seem moldy.
  • The module gets a deprecated status for time t. In that time, it either gets improved by the original author, or a new maintainer is found, or a seamless migration path is built (1:1 API in a competitive module).
  • After that the module is moved to some CPAN-Nimbus. It is not quite deleted, but if you search on CPAN it is not visible by default.

    All Perl:   MT, NLP, NLU

  • Comment on Re: Re: The quantity vs. quality lesson

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: The quantity vs. quality lesson
by Hanamaki (Chaplain) on Jun 02, 2004 at 07:40 UTC
    Difficult to judge wether a module is old and unmainted and therefore should be removed.

    Some people just get panic reading something like "last release 1998" , but it could be well written software which does not need any maintance, updates or whatever. The newest ist best! results quite often in usenet messages like "Is (n)vi abandoned?" which I view as a rather funny message. And, shame on me, I regularly use, as a part of my toolbelt, the unix command "diff" and don't even know wether its regularly updated, maintened or whatever.
      Actually diff could use some shape up as for intra line and binary diff...

      But if a Module - lets say my favourite Parse::RecDescent will have it's last update in 2001 and we'll have the year 2007, then I see no problem:

      • Keeping it if there will be no other module (and we know Damian won't write it) like Parse::FastDescent with same API, but just functionally equivalent/better and faster.
      • Moving it to CPAN-Nimbus else
      And I'm not saying newest is best. I thought I could discuss at the monastery, on some sophisticated level where it is not necessary to say everything explicitedly.

          All Perl:   MT, NLP, NLU

        Modules should never be removed. Other scripts and applications may depend on them, and I consider backward compatibility to be an important feature.

        Rather write a comment on cpanratings if you think that a module is bad, or add a bug report on Share your knowledge with the community, it is already possible. Right now.

    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://359241]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others drinking their drinks and smoking their pipes about the Monastery: (5)
As of 2023-06-09 11:58 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How often do you go to conferences?

    Results (35 votes). Check out past polls.