comment on

I don't think Sourceforge is a good idea. It is really intended for full scale projects, and is likely to be even less suited to a small module than CPAN.

However, there is a problem with proliferation of modules on CPAN. It's getting harder, in my experience, to find interesting new modules, just because of the sheer size of CPAN. Also, often modules appear with no prior discussion on the mailing list. I don't think this is helpful, at least in general.

Some kind of peer review of CPAN modules would be useful. probably informal, like the XP system here, rather than a formal (and costly) system, like that used in the scientific literature.

-- Anthony Staines

In reply to Peer review of CPAN modules? by astaines
in thread Is it acceptable to upload non-serious modules to CPAN? by Eyck

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks