+1 to Peter's post. This is insightful. I, for one, think that Acme:: modules shouldn't even get packaged at all, unless they're a prerequisite of a serious package -- like Acme::Damn was picked up by some other module as a dependency.
Sometimes, Acme:: modules are useful (like ::Damn) -- beyond what the author had envisioned. However, if they thought it'd be useful for general purpose use, they wouldn't have put it under Acme. I still don't see why this is better or even different from Term::ProgressBar, which is already packaged. Personally I'd advocate for not packaging this module and closing this bug, unless you have a compelling reason to do otherwise. Cheers, Jonathan On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Peter Makholm<pe...@makholm.net> wrote: > Salvatore Bonaccorso <salvatore.bonacco...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> Owner: Salvatore Bonaccorso <salvatore.bonacco...@gmail.com> >> >> * Package name : libacme-progressbar-perl >> Version : 1.125 >> Upstream Author : Ricardo SIGNES <r...@cpan.org> >> * URL : http://search.cpan.org/dist/Acme-ProgressBar/ >> * License : Artistic | GPL-1+ >> Programming Lang: Perl >> Description : Perl module providing a simple progress bar > > This is a joke, right? Have you read the code? > > Could we please add something to the perl policy about ITP's of > Acme-modules should contain some justification for packaging the > module and at least metion that the pacakge description should include > a big fat warning about the modul being a joke? > > Basically this module implements a progress bar by timing the task nad > then sleeping the same amount of time 9 times. > > //Makholm > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
