Gosh, now I understand the pleasant surprise of Adrian Howard in finding that someone is actually using one of his modules, Test::Block. (Of course, that's not such a big deal for Adrian which is very well known as a Perl QA person as it is for me, I think.)
Sometime ago, I was delighted with a journal entry by Acme where Number::Bytes::Human were used. And now I read a splendid review by David Golden on Devel::Hide. That made me proud and anxious to release more useful modules out there and improve the ones I already got out-doors.
Although it's not working perfectly, the is_prereq metric of CPANTS surprises me from time to time...
By the way, did you know that your Number::Bytes::Human is a prereq of Chroniton?
Re: is_prereq
ferreira on 2007-03-11T20:28:07
Yep. For a long time, I watch this interesting piece of data that CPANTS provides (http://use.perl.org/user/ferreira/journal/30945). And it seems like tools such as CPANTS and cpantesters are just getting better to let authors know better about the current exposition of their modules. I say exposition, because as someone else noticed, automated testing like smoke servers assessed the modules without implying actual usage.
