[PBP-pm] Reviewing PBP recommended modules?
Xavier Noria
fxn at hashref.com
Tue Nov 22 21:34:41 PST 2005
On Nov 23, 2005, at 6:14, Darren Duncan wrote:
> A few miscellaneous replies ...
>
> I strongly disagree with the idea of putting "PBP" in a module name
> just to say that it is conformant to what the book says. Module
> names should fit based on their function mainly, and minor
> implementation details shouldn't factor in. In fact, doing this
> would by itself violate a best naming practice.
I second that.
> If you want to have modules searchable by conformability, you can
> accomplish that if the modules mention it in their documentation,
> since CPAN lets you search for things based on their documentation.
Even if it claimed to be PBP comformant I would still wonder to
_which_ subset of PBP it is conformant. Different modules will follow
different subsets, so the homogeneity some see in a "PBP" marker is
going to be there modulus what the author chose to comply with,
that's a too weak homogeneity to deserve a marker in my view.
I would leave PBP to influence authors by itself, to percolate in the
way they publish modules, and have as a secondary effect a better CPAN.
-- fxn
More information about the PBP-pm
mailing list