Reviews by

cpanratings
 

RSS

HDB (1.0) *

Why this module is trying to fix a problem worthy of fixing, it's not the first to do so. Nor is it the second, third, or forth. More importantly, this module should not be a top level namespace.

triv - 2004-09-13T22:30:09 (permalink)

1 out of 1 found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Net-DNS-IgnoreVerisign (0.01) *

As the Net::DNS maintainer, I must advise people to not use this module. It makes several assumptions regarding the internal workings of Net::DNS. Changes to those internals (which could happen at any time) would break this module.

triv - 2003-09-25T20:10:09 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Unix (0.02) *

Firstly, the name is simply horrendous. The functionality of the module has almost nothing to do with UNIX. Proc::Pipe::Simple would be a better name. Secondly, releasing a new version of a distribution without updating the change-log is a pet-peeve of mine. Third, nay-saying your critics in the documentation is at best a faux-pa. The reviews of this module have more than one good comment on how to improve it, they should be listened to, not rebutted.

triv - 2003-09-02T20:15:56 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Acme-JAPH (0.03) ****

While the module is totally silly, it is an Acme module.

triv - 2003-08-29T18:12:37 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

Regexp-Profanity-US (0.6) *

I think it's very odd that this module doesn't use the interface provided by Regexp::Common. Regexp::Common provides a very easy way to add additional regular expressions to %RE with the pattern function. The interface this module uses is difficult to understand at best.

triv - 2003-08-13T20:06:54 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No

HTML-Mason (1.22) *****

HTML::Mason gives you not only a great templating system (with OOish features like inheritance), but a full web application framework. A wonderful module that can easily do large enterprise sites.

triv - 2003-08-13T10:10:58 (permalink)

Was this review helpful to you?  Yes No