[Python-Dev] PyPI comments and ratings, *really*?

[Jesse Noller]

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 6:25 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
>> And how many of the "good" comments are astroturfers?
>
> If I understand that term correctly, it's about disguise: how would
> I be able to answer that question?

It's unprovable. But I could see a group of people easily coordinating
large amounts of negative, or positive feedback targeting particular
packages, that looks legit.

I know any "end user" rating and feedback system can be gamed. Just
look at the reviews of milk on amazon.

>> What's so bad about package maintainers from having an opt-out?
>
> PyPI is not just (and perhaps not even primarily) there for the package
> authors, but for the package users (and not surprisingly, it's
> primarily the package authors who ask for banning the user opinions).
>
> I'm just not willing to submit to one side; hence the poll.

That's because as an author/maintainer - we have methods of giving
feedback and communication. Why not rate ( or auto-rate) packages on
objective criteria?

E.g.: tests and test coverage, docs, installs on python version X, Y,
Z, works on windows, etc?

Quality can be measured. Me being a total failure and not reading the
docs, and failing to install something is subjective. I don't disagree
with the goal of giving *users* a voice, but is PyPI the right place
for that? How many moderators do we have to watch comments? Can other
users down vote comments by people which are simply *wrong*?

Why can't we just disable it until we can come up with a better system
that finds a balance between the rights of maintainers, and those of
the user?