I just did a quick google search of the perl groups and was not able to
locate any relevant information: I'm trying to find out if there is any
kind of informal method available to gain confidence that a particular
CPAN module is reliable. I know there is no formal process, but it
seems to me that good, stable, reliable modules will have earned a good
reputation and that this reputation will be visible somehow on the
internet. But I've not been able to find any "reliable" way of doing
this check. When I come across a CPAN module that's not part of the
standard Perl release, it's often very hard to tell if the module is any
good.

I'd appreciate any pointers, tips, discussion, etc. on this issue.

[I'm not sure if this is the best group to post this question to - It
doesn't appear to be too heavily posted to (may be my news servers
fault). So I may try also posting the question in comp.lang.perl.misc.]


Thanks!
--

On 07/19/2007 02:58 PM, Jim Cochrane wrote:
> I just did a quick google search of the perl groups and was not able to
> locate any relevant information: I'm trying to find out if there is any
> kind of informal method available to gain confidence that a particular
> CPAN module is reliable. I know there is no formal process, but it
> seems to me that good, stable, reliable modules will have earned a good
> reputation and that this reputation will be visible somehow on the
> internet. But I've not been able to find any "reliable" way of doing
> this check. When I come across a CPAN module that's not part of the
> standard Perl release, it's often very hard to tell if the module is any
> good.
>
> I'd appreciate any pointers, tips, discussion, etc. on this issue.
>
> [I'm not sure if this is the best group to post this question to - It
> doesn't appear to be too heavily posted to (may be my news servers
> fault). So I may try also posting the question in comp.lang.perl.misc.]
>
>
> Thanks!

AFAIK, cpanratings.perl.org is the only thing. There are some modules
that are known as trustworthy, and some authors are known to be
trustworthy. Aside from the personal experiences of some people in the
Perl community, cpanratings seems to be the only option in regard to
establishing the reliability and utility of CPAN modules.

And even that is sometimes questionable:
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=cpanratings

Hi

> AFAIK, cpanratings.perl.org is the only thing. There are some modules

See also http://cpantesters.perl.org/ and http://cpants.perl.org/author/.
Eg: My PAUSE id is RSAVAGE, so try http://cpants.perl.org/author/RSAVAGE
and http://cpants.perl.org/highscores/many

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:58:21 +0200, Jim Cochrane wrote:
> I just did a quick google search of the perl groups and was not able to
> locate any relevant information: I'm trying to find out if there is any
> kind of informal method available to gain confidence that a particular
> CPAN module is reliable. I know there is no formal process, but it
> seems to me that good, stable, reliable modules will have earned a good
> reputation and that this reputation will be visible somehow on the
> internet. But I've not been able to find any "reliable" way of doing
> this check. When I come across a CPAN module that's not part of the
> standard Perl release, it's often very hard to tell if the module is any
> good.

The modules in thus list should be reliable:

http://qa.perl.org/phalanx/100/

--
Peter Scott
http://www.perlmedic.com/
http://www.perldebugged.com/

On 07/19/2007 11:20 PM, Ron Savage wrote:
> Hi
>
>> AFAIK, cpanratings.perl.org is the only thing. There are some modules
>
> See also http://cpantesters.perl.org/ and http://cpants.perl.org/author/.
> Eg: My PAUSE id is RSAVAGE, so try http://cpants.perl.org/author/RSAVAGE
> and http://cpants.perl.org/highscores/many

Thank you.

On 2007-07-20, Ron Savage <ron [at] savage.net.au> wrote:
> Hi
>
>> AFAIK, cpanratings.perl.org is the only thing. There are some modules
>
> See also http://cpantesters.perl.org/ and http://cpants.perl.org/author/.
> Eg: My PAUSE id is RSAVAGE, so try http://cpants.perl.org/author/RSAVAGE
> and http://cpants.perl.org/highscores/many

Thanks - to Mumia W., Ron Savage, and Peter Scott for your responses.

This is what I was looking for - it looks like these sites will be
useful in helping to figure out whether a particular module is ready for
"prime-time".

Thanks!

--