I see here a chance to acquire a startling lack of interest, along with, likely, a handful of idle downvotes ... just because the thread's already so long and "done". So I'll go for it (as is my style) with one final observation:
I disagree with the characterization of Module-Authors as an automatic
resource guaranteed to give quality or authoritative guidance. My experience with it was
that it simply wasn't. Nobody with any real wisdom was paying any attention, maybe,
that week. Or who knows. For whatever reason, when I asked about a namespace for a CPAN
module I was preparing, I got mostly the flakiest kind of bandwidth and time -wasting
idiocy from the kind of compulsive person who doesn't yet know what they are talking about
(and may never) but cannot restrain themselves from making an appearence anyway. A real
flame-bait-resisting waste of time, all in all. I doubt that I'll ever seek guidance there
In my opinion, which is based on my direct experience with it (not hearsay, not theory, not
wishful thinking, not an assumption), you'll get good advice from the Module-Authors List if
you are both lucky and, likely, persistent. If you are neither, you won't.
There's a larger issue here. I would be far more hesitant than I see many Monks being here,
about advocating in answer to queries like this one, the use of external (to Perlmonks) resources
whether they are Web-based community sites, Mailing lists or newsgroups, or whatever newer
kind of forum appears next. I humbly suggest that: If you aren't actively
involved in that site or forum on a continuing basis and not taking responsibility for
some degree for how well it is fulfilling its charter, then: think twice before recommending it
to a fellow Monk! Just the fact that you know that something exists that the asker
seems not to, is not sufficient grounds to endorse it to them. And furthermore,
jusy because something emanates from a particular domain, e.g. perl.org, this
also (sad tho it may be to say) does not make it valid to assume that it is a really
helpful resource at the current time.
Of course there are people here at Perlmonks, like everywhere, that just like to see their
own name on a node, and whether others take them seriously, or whether they have a reputation
for being astute or sensible, doesn't seem to concern them. Thus the old expression
"consider the source."
Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
Please read these before you post! —
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
- a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.
| & || & |
| < || < |
| > || > |
| [ || [ |
| ] || ] ||