Front page | perl.bootstrap |
Postings from July 2000
So what I've seen filling up my mailbox lately is this.
1) Some people think p5p is fine, or can be repaired and carried on for
perl6.
2) Some people think p5p is not fine and a different approach is needed
for perl6.
Now, p5p's model may very well be good enough, but if all we cared
about is good enough we wouldn't be rewriting perl.
Let's agree to disagree and fork these two developments. p5p can
continue to repair and develop itself. perl6 can strike off in bold,
new directions and experiment with a new communication model for the
perl developer community. After a bit we'll reevaluate the state of
the two, see which is working out better and adopt it for perl6.
As I have little experience in mailing lists or p5p, I hereby nominate
Simon Cozens to act as the loyal opposition on behalf of p5p and
coordinate with Ask and Ziggy the details of when and how we'll
evaluate the state of the two models. Simon, if you don't want that,
nominate somebody else.
Go to it, kids.
PS please, no more about p5p unless its in relation to developing on
perl6's experimental model (whatever that should be).
--
Michael G Schwern http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ schwern@pobox.com
Just Another Stupid Consultant Perl6 Kwalitee Ashuranse
BOFH excuse #245:
The Borg tried to assimilate your system. Resistance is futile.