Seems some folks are taking me to task for having the temerity to upload Bundle::Ovid to the CPAN. That bundle is just a bunch of modules I constantly use but people seem to be frosted that I would (ab)use the CPAN like that. One person wrote "This is not what CPAN is for". Really? What is the CPAN for?
I have to admit, this confuses me. No one seemed to be upset when Simon Cozens started the trend. No one complained when Schwern followed suit. Ask has one. And don't forget Alberto Manuel Brandão Simões, brian d foy and José Alves de Castro (cog). However, I'm the only person getting flack for this.
So, what do you think? Do you think tiny bundles which take up virtually no resources but are extremely helpful to some developers are a bad idea? If you argue "waste of resources", are they your resources? Do you want the Acme:: namespace pulled, too?
It's often been said that a technology proves its worth when it's profitably used in ways the inventors didn't anticipate. That's part of what makes the CPAN great. This is also part of the reason why ideas to "forcibly improve CPAN quality" are constantly shut down. We want to make the CPAN easier for people to contribute, not harder. That's what people are missing.
So go make your personal bundles and put 'em on the CPAN. The next time you do a fresh install of Perl or go to work on a new Perl job, you'll be grateful.
And for some reason, I'm getting weird "error reading from remote server" messages when I try to log in an and comment on the reviews. Gah!
Kwalitee or Quality?
chromatic on 2005-09-21T19:17:11
Hm, you could almost consider this as a list of non-core modules that you recommend highly. In my mind that's a better recommendation than "WOW, this module is SO COOL because it ships TWO POD TESTS that couldn't possibly be different on any user machine."
Maybe they didn't notice before
itub on 2005-09-21T19:20:47
Hey, you are taking 5 kB of space on CPAN! I'll have to buy a new hard drive to host my CPAN mirror because of you! I'll send you the bill!
;-)
Nah, my guess is that in the "old times" it wasn't as fashionable to watch the recent CPAN uploads every day and rate them immediately. That's why COG, BDFOY, et al. slipped below the radar.
:-)
As it is often said: CPAN is what it is
because it allows anyone to upload junk, not despite of it. I think it is fine if you upload "vanity" modules/bundles, as long as they don't clutter useful namespaces.
New namespace?
jplindstrom on 2005-09-21T20:07:12
How about a new namespace? Bundle::Personal::* or something?
Why 5.8.7?
iburrell on 2005-09-21T20:56:30
The only thing I wonder about is the line at the top of Makefile.PL.
use 5.008007;
Is there some reason only people running 5.8.7 can install your bundle?
Re:Why 5.8.7?
Ovid on 2005-09-21T21:11:09
D'oh! No. That was auto-generated. Thanks for the catch.
Screw 'em
petdance on 2005-09-21T21:33:24
So someone gripes about a bundle on CPAN. Whine whine whine.
CPAN thrives BECAUSE of the unfettered uploading of shit, not in spite of it.
Bundle::PerlforHomePages
kennyg on 2005-09-21T21:59:07
OK, i'm probably opening myself up for ridicule, but, where's the harm in making a module for your use, and making it available to others who might find it useful? I've always thought there should be an easy way for users to get setup easily for the task at hand, and a bundle seems like the logical choice for that.
Re:Bundle::PerlforHomePages
Ovid on 2005-09-21T22:14:23
You're right. There's nothing wrong with it. While I can understand why some wouldn't want these on the CPAN, stifling uses we think are inappropriate needlessly raises the bar.
Re:Bundle::PerlforHomePages
pudge on 2005-09-21T22:56:54
Ignore the whiners.
Also, I bet people did gripe about the others, and that you just didn't know about the griping.
A few points...
jacques on 2005-09-22T08:39:53
I offered my opinion about your bundle on cpanratings.
Let me make a few remarks about your recent comments. First of all, Simon Cozens' bundle predates cpanratings as does brian's and probably the others you point out.
So yours drew attention when you uploaded it. (itub already pointed this out in a previous reply.)
I am not singling you out. I don't even know you personally, and don't make presumptions about your character or habits based on a single module. I am only commenting on your contribution to the CPAN.
Re:A few points...
Ovid on 2005-09-22T15:28:04
Possible it wasn't clear from my post, but I didn't take it as a personal attack against me. You can tell me that all of my modules are awful and I'll know you're talking about my modules. No worries there.
And while I certainly have a different view on this issue, I also haven't made any presumptions about you. You're probably a great person; I just think you're wrong about personal bundles :)
clearly a case of those who need a hobby
hfb on 2005-09-22T08:43:59
Years ago I begged people to do this because it's better than ratings and the damned SDK will never come to pass. It never really caught on as people prefer to piss on OPM instead but I still have hope it will quietly gain momentum after all these years.
The SDK will never come to pass and ratings remain useless. This is the only way. They're small and harder to game than other methods currently in use.
Fucking whiners can go pound sand.
Bundles are SDKs
Tim Bunce on 2005-09-22T09:06:35
Spread the word: Bundles are the nearest thing we have to Software Development Kits.
That's the reason
http://search.cpan.org/modlist/Bundles is titled "Bundles (and SDKs)". (Of course that only lists 'registered' bundles, but that's a separate issue.)
I'd like to see many more people uploading bundles defining sets of modules that they use. Even better if the bundles define explicit module versions that are known to work together.
Better still if the bundle definition is managed as part of the configuration management of a large company/project that invests testing effort into the bundled modules. For example, companies like the BBC, Vodafone, MorganStanley are all big users of Perl who carefully test and manage sets of perl modules for their own use. It would be useful if those tested sets were published as Bundles aka SDKs.
People with large bundles would make them more useful to others by splitting them up into (possibly overlapping) topic-related subsets: Bundle::TIMB::Database, Bundle::TIMB::XML etc etc. Remember that bundles can include bundles.
*Some* Bundles are SDKs
n1vux on 2005-09-27T16:47:57
This is a timely thread, as I was just grazing for modules to recommend for our site_perl libs, and wasn't finding kwalitee or ratings terribly helpful. (Kwalittee doesn't even add a point for removing blah blah blah and a.u.thor@ from template POD!)
Using Bundle::* as the real recommendation will be rather more useful, for some of the Bundles. Those bundles that are personal SDK sets (e.g., Bundle::SDK::PAUSEID) are far more useful as "recommendations" than Bundle::ALLBY::PAUSEID, which some of these Bunlde::PAUSEID are. kitchen-sink distros like Bundle::XML or Bundle::DateTime, while useful to developers working in the area, will not help me pick which XML::* are considered more robust or whatever. (Bundle::DateTime++ for saying so in POD!) Simon may have the right idea in using the Bundle::SDK::* namespace for his preferred SDK set.
Of course that only lists 'registered' bundles, but that's a separate issue.
Yes, the difference in entries between modlist/Bundles and query=Bundle is doubly distressing. Way too many things appear under Query (Module and Distro### and README) but only a handful are Registered.
Bundles which appear to be SDK-ish, as opposed to ALLBY or Module-and-Prerequisites or ALLABOUT --
I eagerly await the ?promised? Bundle::SDK::TIMB::* and hopefully many more good examples. If my site_perl selections achieve a certain stability, I'll investigate if I might be allowed to contribute a Bundle::${DayJob} based on my library selections.
-- Bill, not speaking for ${DayJob} at this time.
Maybe I know what the problem is and what I'll do
cog on 2005-09-22T10:57:04
I would say it was because no one really cares about me and you get a lot more attention, but then there's brian's case...
Whatever.
I actually gave a lot of thought to uploading Bundle::COG or not. The truth is that it really saves me a lot of time, and it does serve a couple or purposes which I'll not go into.
The thing is:
For some time I've been thinking of uploading a Bundle::SDK::COG (kind of like Simons' Bundle::SDK::SIMON, but with the modules I use the most).
I think now I will.
I'm standing up right next to you, Curtis.
Oh, and BTW, regarding the thing about a Bundle module being useful to it's creator, that's BS, because I actually install Bundle::AMBS with every fresh Perl install, as he works in an area that interests me.
A more pertitent question
Simon on 2005-09-22T14:03:10
"What is cpanratings for?" My answer is that it's
a place for blowhards to let off steam, and I suggest you treat it as such.
Saving space?
ambs on 2005-09-22T14:37:45
Sorry, but I didn't read all the comments, as I'm in a hurry at the moment. But somebody told me there was my name in this post, so here is my answer:
Bundles includes just a few text. Everytime I release a new one, I delete the old one. Everytime I release a new module, I check if I should remove an old one. I think the people concerned with the space should ask people which maintain dozens of copies of the same module in CPAN.
