Repeat after me. "CPANTS is _not_ a game. CPANTS is _not_ a game".
So I spent a few evenings tidying up all of my CPAN distributions. They now all have the highest kwalitee that I can give them. The only points missing are the ones for your module being used as a pre-requisite by someone else.
As a result, I leapt quite a long way up the CPANTS leaderboard. Which made me very happy.
But now, of course, every new module I release can only have a maximum kwalitee of 17 (as a new module won't be a prereq for another module). So releasing new modules can only bring my average kwalitee down. Any increases in my score are in the hands of other people.
All of which could possibly act as a disincentive for releasing new modules. And that's why I now have to keep reminding myself that "CPANTS is _not_ a game..."
Re: CPANTS
jplindstrom on 2006-06-26T11:56:51
Well, what's the kwalitee score used for?
If it's used to determine the kwalitee of a module, it's useful to know whether someone else uses the module (actually, more interesting than some other stats).
But the kwalitee of an author? That's just weird and not very useful except as a second-order measure of whether a module is good. So that number isn't very useful anyway, except as a vanity thing.
Either you remove it altogether since people tend to misuse it.
Or you game the number so that it steers behaviour in the right direction, i.e. you remove the point for "being a dependency" when you summarize the kwalitee score for an author.Re: CPANTS
jhi on 2006-06-27T05:57:21
Engage the prereq rule only after the module has been released for a year? (Yes, this would mean that the CPANTS rating should probably by a percentage instead of an integer.)