Suggestions for additional evaluation criteria (most don't even require installation -- just links from search.cpan.org)
- What does the version history look like? have there been multiple versions or just one?
- Does it have any reviews? are the comments positive?
- When browsing the source tree, are there many tests?
- What do the test result stats look like? have people with your architecture and perl version gotten test failures?
- Is it in the phalanx? what do it's coverage stats look like?
- Are there robust perldocs?
- What dependencies does it have?
- What is the percentage of unresolved bugs on rt.cpan.org? (don't consider it a negative if there are no bugs at all, it might not be used)
- Does it have a mailing list with public archives? is there a healthy amount of traffic on that list?
-
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.
|
