| Newsgroups |
perl.scripts |
| Message-ID |
<[email protected]> |
On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 09:35:01AM -0400, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> I think that it would be a worthwhile exercise to go through all of them
> and figure out which ones were worth keeping, and move them to the main
> scripts archive. And the ones that were deemed not worth keeping,
> perhaps it would be worthwhile to demonstrate an alternative way of
> doing the same thing, and present the old way and the new way together
> somehow, with some commentary of why the old way seemed like a good idea
> at the time - apparently, mostly because we were still using Perl 4 at
> the time.
While can I see and appreciate the intention, isn't this a slippery
slope? Do we want a committee that's going to judge which scripts
are "good enough" to be part of the archive, and which aren't?
The modules section of CPAN isn't peer reviewed either, everyone can put
anything he/she wants there. I think that the advantages of that outweigth
the disadvantages. I think the same should hold for scripts.
Now, it doesn't hurt to point out that certain scripts were written
X years ago, when there were no (or less) modules; that they were written
for older versions of Perl, and that there might be CPAN modules that do
the work as well.
Abigail