[PBP-pm] Reviewing PBP recommended modules?

Sagar Shah sagarshah at softhome.net
Thu Nov 24 23:54:55 PST 2005


On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 10:37 +0000, Peter Haworth wrote:
> On Tue Nov 22 11:39:41 PST 2005, C. Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, Karen J. Cravens wrote:
> > > On Tue, 22 Nov 2005, C. Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > >
> > > CGG>CPAN being what it is... how do you suggest someone find
> > > CGG>modules which bill themselves as PBP conformant?
> > >
> > > Most emphatically: by some other way than namespace.
> >
> > What other way?
> 
> How about bundles? There could be a separate Bundle::PBP::category for
> each category that we care to recommend modules in. Since bundles are
> essentially just documentation, there's plenty of scope for including
> explanations, comparisons, non-recommendations, etc.

This is the best suggestion imho.

Modules should remain in their native namespaces and their names should
not be 'polluted' by a PBP tag. A bundle distribution can be maintained
to list all PBP 'compliant'/'refactored' modules. Introducing a PBP tag
might be unfair to other module authors who have/will stuck to best
practices as per the book but don't want to rename their module.
-- 
Sagar Shah <sagarshah at softhome.net>



More information about the PBP-pm mailing list