[mplspm]: Module validity?

[Chris Josephes]

On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Thomas Eibner wrote:

> > I have a project I'm working on.  I plan on using the code myself for
> > sure, but the principle of the code is relatively common on CPAN.  It's a
> > template parser, and there are already a few of those uploaded.  I'd like
> > to upload the code to CPAN to see if there is interest, and to maybe
> > encourage outside development and involvement.
> 
> You could bring it up on perlmonks.org or a similar discussion fora, like
> NEWS:comp.lang.perl.modules (is that right?). I'm afraid though, that you
> are not going to get much possitive additude if you're making yet another
> templating module without really bringing something brilliantly new to
> the module (not my own attitude, but mostly the attitude of people on
> different mailinglists I've encountered).

Good point.  I'm hoping that I can at least make one or two convincing
arguments.

The goal of the project was to create an extendable templating system that
didn't look like perl, and could possibly be ported to other languages
like Python or Java.  Also, it was to have a simple, but flexible syntax
that can accomodate most needs.

> There have been a lot of people that have been told to find different
> namespaces at least. I don't think many authors have been directly
> forbidden to upload their modules (if any)

Yeah, I've had namespace recommendations as well, which for the most part
have been reasonable, and made sense in the long run.  Most of the modules
I've published have covered things that nobody has tried before, or things
that were of little consequence to really matter in the long run.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Josephes    | http://www.visi.com/~cpj1
cpj1 at visi.com           |




--------------------------------------------------
Minneapolis Perl Mongers mailing list

To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo at pm.org
with "unsubscribe mpls" in the body of the message.