Re: Documenting best practices and the state of ToolChain guidelines using CPAN and POD

On 6 May 2015 at 21:08, Philippe Bruhat (BooK) <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Going back to the original proposal, the distrinction between "Org"
> and "Project" seems actually minimal. So, the split would really be
> between "authors" and "organizations". And actually, Project::Perl and
> Project::Toolchain doesn't sound that bad either.
>

Projects tend to cross-cut the concerns of Orgs. For instance, DBIC and
Moose projects are not mutually exclusive with Toolchain.

Toolchain for instance will have policies that apply strictly to stuff
toolchain authors are involved with , but will still have opinions that are
widely applicable to the whole of CPAN, whereas Moose is much finer grained
and its opinions are less likely to be consumed by people who aren't
specifically working with moose, and Moose maintainers are likely to want
to regularly defer to the policies set by toolchain.

-- 
Kent

*KENTNL* - https://metacpan.org/author/KENTNL