FAQ
Hi all!

I wrote a critique of where Perl 6 is heading. It was published in Freshmeat:

http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/1339/

The history of this article is a bit eventful. What I can say is that I sent
it to Freshmeat.net because I saw that my editor at O'ReillyNet was not
responsive. However, after it was sent, I received some more commentary from
him, which I did not respond to or integrate yet. The Freshmeat article
eventually was edited and published, afterwards without this commentary,
because its editor invested time in publishing it. It is still mostly
pertinent.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish
--

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.

Search Discussions

  • Randal L. Schwartz at Oct 17, 2004 at 5:50 am
    "Shlomi" == Shlomi Fish writes:
    Shlomi> The history of this article is a bit eventful. What I can say
    Shlomi> is that I sent it to Freshmeat.net because I saw that my
    Shlomi> editor at O'ReillyNet was not responsive. However, after it
    Shlomi> was sent, I received some more commentary from him, which I
    Shlomi> did not respond to or integrate yet. The Freshmeat article
    Shlomi> eventually was edited and published, afterwards without this
    Shlomi> commentary, because its editor invested time in publishing
    Shlomi> it. It is still mostly pertinent.

    You are apparently not taking seriously anything that is being said
    that is critical of you. Your story above also argues for that. In
    fact, it says that Freshmeat is willing to publish any random
    half-thought-through opinion, which means that it's about as worthless
    as a blog. I'd admire that O'ReillyNet failed to accept your dribble
    as requested.

    --
    Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
    <merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
    Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
    See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
  • Shlomi Fish at Oct 17, 2004 at 10:56 am

    On Sunday 17 October 2004 07:49, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
    "Shlomi" == Shlomi Fish <shlomif@iglu.org.il> writes:
    Shlomi> The history of this article is a bit eventful. What I can say
    Shlomi> is that I sent it to Freshmeat.net because I saw that my
    Shlomi> editor at O'ReillyNet was not responsive. However, after it
    Shlomi> was sent, I received some more commentary from him, which I
    Shlomi> did not respond to or integrate yet. The Freshmeat article
    Shlomi> eventually was edited and published, afterwards without this
    Shlomi> commentary, because its editor invested time in publishing
    Shlomi> it. It is still mostly pertinent.

    You are apparently not taking seriously anything that is being said
    that is critical of you.
    Why do you think so?
    Your story above also argues for that. In
    fact, it says that Freshmeat is willing to publish any random
    half-thought-through opinion, which means that it's about as worthless
    as a blog. I'd admire that O'ReillyNet failed to accept your dribble
    as requested.
    That's not quite accurate. I sent the article to the O'Reilly Net editor a few
    times, in which he passed critique on it. The last time I sent it to him, I
    waited for quite a long time, and so believed I won't get an answer.
    Throughout the all time, I wasn't sure that the article will be published
    there and the editor's purpose was to make sure the article was good enough.

    After I waited for a while, I sent it to the Freshmeat editor. Then, a few
    days since, I received a reply from the O'Reilly Net editor with extra
    critique of the article. I did not have a chance to respond to it, because I
    was busy in other things. A few days afterwards, I received a notice from the
    Freshmeat editor that he edited the article, and was about to publish it. So
    it had to be published there.

    Regards,

    Shlomi Fish
    --

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
    Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

    Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.
  • Adam Turoff at Oct 17, 2004 at 11:21 pm

    On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 02:22:29PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
    I wrote a critique of where Perl 6 is heading. It was published in Freshmeat:

    http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/1339/
    Where you say, in part:

    Why Perl 6 is Bad?

    No one Understands Perl 6

    Having read this title, you are probably thinking to yourself: "So
    you don't understand Perl 6. What makes you think everyone else
    doesn't? How do you justify this inductive thinking?" Let me tell
    you a little story:

    One day, I met with a good friend of mine (whom I highly appreciate
    both as a person and as a software engineer), and I asked him if he
    reads the Apocalypses. He said he does, but that he doesn't
    understand them. This eventually made me realize that I also read
    them, and also did not understand many things. And neither he nor I
    are particularly stupid people. And here's an interesting quote from
    the famous Weblog "Joel on Software": "Whenever somebody gives you a
    spec for some new technology, if you can't understand the spec,
    don't worry too much. Nobody else is going to understand it, either,
    and it's probably not going to be important." (Read more at the link).

    If you can say this with a straight face, then you must not have
    listened to the rationale for Perl6, nor heard the four years' worth of
    reiteration of that rationale.

    No, no one knows how to program in Perl 6. And that will continue to be
    the case for another few years. And, no, this is not a problem. It
    took about a decade for some truly bright people to fully comprehend
    Perl 5, and even with that, we're still learning about the nooks and
    crannies in Perl 5.

    And that's why, with the same breath that Larry and others promote Perl 6,
    they are quick to assert that Perl 5 is *NOT GOING AWAY* (as Schwern
    noted in response to your article on fm.net). This simple statement has
    many interpretations, all of them true:

    - The Perl 5 sources will continue to live on, for anyone wants to use
    them or hack on them

    - More people will know Perl 5 than will know Perl 6 for a substantial
    period of time after Perl 6 is released

    - Parrot is designed with the intent to run Perl5 side-by-side with
    Perl6 code in the same process

    - One of the requirements for Perl6 is to faithfully run Perl5
    programs in a "backward compatability mode" with Perl5 if some
    yet-to-be-determined token that this program is actually Perl6 code
    is not found

    In your essay, you have highlighted some social problems with Perl 6,
    many of them true, all of them overinflated in importance. However, the
    people working on Perl 6 are fully cognisant of these issues, and many
    others which you have failed to note. Furthermore, most (if not all) of
    these social issues are actually addressable with a modicum of
    software engineering.

    With that said, I can only conclude that you are creating yet another
    tempest in a teapot by trying to show the entire Perl community the
    errors of its ways, instead of pitching in doing something constructive.

    Z.
  • Shlomi Fish at Oct 20, 2004 at 6:50 pm

    On Monday 18 October 2004 01:21, Adam Turoff wrote:
    On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 02:22:29PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
    I wrote a critique of where Perl 6 is heading. It was published in
    Freshmeat:

    http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/1339/
    Where you say, in part:

    Why Perl 6 is Bad?

    No one Understands Perl 6

    Having read this title, you are probably thinking to yourself: "So
    you don't understand Perl 6. What makes you think everyone else
    doesn't? How do you justify this inductive thinking?" Let me tell
    you a little story:

    One day, I met with a good friend of mine (whom I highly appreciate
    both as a person and as a software engineer), and I asked him if he
    reads the Apocalypses. He said he does, but that he doesn't
    understand them. This eventually made me realize that I also read
    them, and also did not understand many things. And neither he nor I
    are particularly stupid people. And here's an interesting quote from
    the famous Weblog "Joel on Software": "Whenever somebody gives you a
    spec for some new technology, if you can't understand the spec,
    don't worry too much. Nobody else is going to understand it, either,
    and it's probably not going to be important." (Read more at the link).

    If you can say this with a straight face, then you must not have
    listened to the rationale for Perl6, nor heard the four years' worth of
    reiteration of that rationale.

    No, no one knows how to program in Perl 6. And that will continue to be
    the case for another few years. And, no, this is not a problem.
    You are mistaking two things. When I said no-one understands Perl 6, I meant
    that no-one understands the subset of Perl 6 that was presented by Larry Wall
    in the Apocalypses, and was considered a _final subset_ of the Perl 6
    functionality. I wasn't refering to the language as a whole as it is yet
    unkown.

    Regards,

    Shlomi Fish

    --

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
    Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

    Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.
  • Peter Scott at Oct 18, 2004 at 3:11 am
    In article <200410161422.29940.shlomif@iglu.org.il>,
    shlomif@iglu.org.il (Shlomi Fish) writes:
    Hi all!

    I wrote a critique of where Perl 6 is heading. It was published in Freshmeat:
    This is not the first time you have attacked the Perl community on
    the thinnest of grounds and then asked the same people you attacked
    for feedback. I cannot fathom your intent unless you simply thrive
    on conflict. Either way, although I paid attention to you before
    because of your apparent intelligence and talent, I am going to
    ignore you from now on. All your so-called arguments against
    Perl 6 were dismissed years ago and rehashing them in a public
    forum simply insults people such as Larry, Damian, and Alison, who
    have made sacrifices of biblical proportions to get us this far,
    and diverts the valuable time of people like Schwern on rebuttals.
    Shame on you. What a waste of a good mind.
  • Pressio Main Email at Oct 18, 2004 at 5:21 pm
    Hi all,

    Firstly in partial support of Shlomi, I've a shelf full of books relating to
    Perl5 which I've never had enough time to absorb. Now I am resorting to
    using PHP for starting a business designing web apps on a LAMP box.

    Why? My choice of life as an entrepreneur requires me to budget time for
    everything from system design, coding, testing etc through corporate tax,
    marketing, and everything else to do with a solo startup. To expend hours
    coding with a language that is more complex than I need, would jeopardize
    the fledgling enterprise. Not that equivalent functionality is necessarily
    more complex in Perl than in PHP, I just don't know exactly what all that
    other stuff I've seen is for, and then fear my code could be missing
    something crucial and leaving the door open to malicious crackers.

    My impression is that the whole artistic approach and yearn for tersity in
    abstract-looking code don't help the end user with limited time. An extreme
    example is 7 lines that deftly cracked the DVD cipher, spectacular art for
    sure, but aloof from the masses. In general, examples of best practice perl
    coding I found were terse and difficult to follow, and this told me that I'd
    need to put in a lot more time to get comfortable with it. I don't know with
    saving the world etc that I personally will ever have the time. I might be
    lucky to hire hackers who do however, once the LEGO(tm) version of my app is
    operational and bringing in revenue :-)

    So why would I buy in Perl given that I was forced to use PHP to get
    started? Because my (possibly wrong) impression of Perl6 from Larrys'
    summary is that it is not just Turbo Perl5, but introduces design
    abstraction that effectively allow any language to be used on the front end.
    That's amazing.

    It means that a standard LAMP box in any large web hosting company should
    have as standard the Perl6 back-end, then optional plug-ins for the language
    of choice. So perls guru's like you lot can find the next prime with three
    punctuation marks, and evening/weekend coders like me can gimp our way to
    eye-candy web pages with a 1MB 'script'. (exit; why's apache and mod_perl
    gone?)

    (I think a standard reference lamp box complete with a collection of typical
    secure apps in long form syntax would go a long way to propogating Perl,
    both making it easier for hosting companies to offer it and for individuals
    like myself to set one up and start building the next amazon or craigslist.)

    In a way the Perl6 enterprise reminds me of the work on the Hurd over at the
    GNU project. A colossal advance by dedicated individuals working for the
    betterment of all mankind, and it it is totally laudable. I also believe
    both will succeed, because every step of the way what I'm seeing is that the
    individuals involved have not chosen their paths lightly, and won't give up,
    ever.

    I'm a bit concerned that the meritocracy is still causing friction though,
    and ruffled feathers of Perl5 porters still a possibility ("he had to bring
    that up"). As a person who was once in Mensa (and left on principle because
    they wouldn't open membership to the other 98% of humankind), I am a great
    fan of Forest Gump. It's preferable to be a good person and to genuinely
    like yourself and be likeable, than to be smart but hurting others and being
    disliked, any day.

    The danger of a powerful mind is that it can be a puppet of the ID. That
    said, emotional outbursts are natural, and probably good for you, so long as
    they are ultimately followed up by the ethical and diplomatic reflections of
    the frontal lobes. That's my two-cent.

    Shamrock luck to you all,
    Tom Cowap
    Dublin, Ireland


    -----Original Message-----
    From: Shlomi Fish
    Sent: 16 October 2004 13:22
    To: Perl Advocacy
    Subject: Critique of Where Perl 6 is Heading


    Hi all!

    I wrote a critique of where Perl 6 is heading. It was published in
    Freshmeat:

    http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/1339/

    The history of this article is a bit eventful. What I can say is that I sent
    it to Freshmeat.net because I saw that my editor at O'ReillyNet was not
    responsive. However, after it was sent, I received some more commentary from
    him, which I did not respond to or integrate yet. The Freshmeat article
    eventually was edited and published, afterwards without this commentary,
    because its editor invested time in publishing it. It is still mostly
    pertinent.

    Regards,

    Shlomi Fish
    --

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
    Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

    Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.
  • Shlomi Fish at Oct 20, 2004 at 7:03 pm

    On Monday 18 October 2004 19:28, Pressio Main Email wrote:
    Hi all,
    So why would I buy in Perl given that I was forced to use PHP to get
    started? Because my (possibly wrong) impression of Perl6 from Larrys'
    summary is that it is not just Turbo Perl5, but introduces design
    abstraction that effectively allow any language to be used on the front
    end. That's amazing.

    It means that a standard LAMP box in any large web hosting company should
    have as standard the Perl6 back-end, then optional plug-ins for the
    language of choice. So perls guru's like you lot can find the next prime
    with three punctuation marks, and evening/weekend coders like me can gimp
    our way to eye-candy web pages with a 1MB 'script'. (exit; why's apache and
    mod_perl gone?)
    You are confusing Perl 6 and Parrot. Parrot is the future virtual machine that
    aims to run Perl 5, Perl 6, Python and many other languages. Perl 6 is a new
    language that aims to be a better Perl than Perl 5.

    In my article, I did not criticize Parrot, but rather Perl 6.
    (I think a standard reference lamp box complete with a collection of
    typical secure apps in long form syntax would go a long way to propogating
    Perl, both making it easier for hosting companies to offer it and for
    individuals like myself to set one up and start building the next amazon or
    craigslist.)

    In a way the Perl6 enterprise reminds me of the work on the Hurd over at
    the GNU project. A colossal advance by dedicated individuals working for
    the betterment of all mankind, and it it is totally laudable. I also
    believe both will succeed, because every step of the way what I'm seeing is
    that the individuals involved have not chosen their paths lightly, and
    won't give up, ever.
    GNU Hurd? Hurd is an operating system kernel whose development started before
    the Linux kernel, and still continues to this day. Plenty of people have
    worked on it, but it is still not ready for prime time. It's unstable,
    dog-slow, and supports very little hardware. Granted, it has some interesting
    design concepts, but is not something I'd prefer to use over Linux or the
    BSDs or whatever, and won't be for a forseeable future.

    Now, did you compare Hurd to Parrot or to Perl 6?
    I'm a bit concerned that the meritocracy is still causing friction though,
    and ruffled feathers of Perl5 porters still a possibility ("he had to bring
    that up"). As a person who was once in Mensa (and left on principle because
    they wouldn't open membership to the other 98% of humankind), I am a great
    fan of Forest Gump. It's preferable to be a good person and to genuinely
    like yourself and be likeable, than to be smart but hurting others and
    being disliked, any day.

    The danger of a powerful mind is that it can be a puppet of the ID. That
    said, emotional outbursts are natural, and probably good for you, so long
    as they are ultimately followed up by the ethical and diplomatic
    reflections of the frontal lobes. That's my two-cent.
    What are you implying? I started working on this article a few years ago, and
    has stood by it all this time. This is the latest incarnation of it. It was
    not an emotional ourburst.

    Regards,

    Shlomi Fish

    --

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
    Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

    Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.
  • Tom Cowap at Oct 24, 2004 at 8:33 pm
    Parrot is the universal back-end, I see. Consider me enlightened.
    (Typical lightweight programmer here)

    My HURD comparison was solely on the dedication of the individuals involved,
    rather than the readiness for widespread adoption. RMS et al have been
    forthright on that score, it's for hackers and would-be hackers right now.

    PS. the emotional outburst I was referring to was not any posting of
    Schlomi,
    but my (perhaps wrong) perception of high emotion in another posting.
    No biggie.

    Tom
    Ireland

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Shlomi Fish
    Sent: 20 October 2004 20:07
    To: advocacy@perl.org
    Subject: Re: Critique of Where Perl 6 is Heading

    On Monday 18 October 2004 19:28, Pressio Main Email wrote:
    Hi all,
    So why would I buy in Perl given that I was forced to use PHP to get
    started? Because my (possibly wrong) impression of Perl6 from Larrys'
    summary is that it is not just Turbo Perl5, but introduces design
    abstraction that effectively allow any language to be used on the front
    end. That's amazing.

    It means that a standard LAMP box in any large web hosting company should
    have as standard the Perl6 back-end, then optional plug-ins for the
    language of choice. So perls guru's like you lot can find the next prime
    with three punctuation marks, and evening/weekend coders like me can gimp
    our way to eye-candy web pages with a 1MB 'script'. (exit; why's apache and
    mod_perl gone?)
    You are confusing Perl 6 and Parrot. Parrot is the future virtual machine
    that
    aims to run Perl 5, Perl 6, Python and many other languages. Perl 6 is a new
    language that aims to be a better Perl than Perl 5.

    In my article, I did not criticize Parrot, but rather Perl 6.
    (I think a standard reference lamp box complete with a collection of
    typical secure apps in long form syntax would go a long way to propogating
    Perl, both making it easier for hosting companies to offer it and for
    individuals like myself to set one up and start building the next amazon or
    craigslist.)

    In a way the Perl6 enterprise reminds me of the work on the Hurd over at
    the GNU project. A colossal advance by dedicated individuals working for
    the betterment of all mankind, and it it is totally laudable. I also
    believe both will succeed, because every step of the way what I'm seeing is
    that the individuals involved have not chosen their paths lightly, and
    won't give up, ever.
    GNU Hurd? Hurd is an operating system kernel whose development started
    before
    the Linux kernel, and still continues to this day. Plenty of people have
    worked on it, but it is still not ready for prime time. It's unstable,
    dog-slow, and supports very little hardware. Granted, it has some
    interesting
    design concepts, but is not something I'd prefer to use over Linux or the
    BSDs or whatever, and won't be for a forseeable future.

    Now, did you compare Hurd to Parrot or to Perl 6?
    I'm a bit concerned that the meritocracy is still causing friction though,
    and ruffled feathers of Perl5 porters still a possibility ("he had to bring
    that up"). As a person who was once in Mensa (and left on principle because
    they wouldn't open membership to the other 98% of humankind), I am a great
    fan of Forest Gump. It's preferable to be a good person and to genuinely
    like yourself and be likeable, than to be smart but hurting others and
    being disliked, any day.

    The danger of a powerful mind is that it can be a puppet of the ID. That
    said, emotional outbursts are natural, and probably good for you, so long
    as they are ultimately followed up by the ethical and diplomatic
    reflections of the frontal lobes. That's my two-cent.
    What are you implying? I started working on this article a few years ago,
    and
    has stood by it all this time. This is the latest incarnation of it. It was
    not an emotional ourburst.

    Regards,

    Shlomi Fish

    --

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shlomi Fish shlomif@iglu.org.il
    Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/

    Knuth is not God! It took him two days to build the Roman Empire.
  • Ask Bjoern Hansen at Nov 7, 2004 at 11:48 pm
    Pressio Main Email writes:

    [...]
    punctuation marks, and evening/weekend coders like me can gimp our way to
    eye-candy web pages with a 1MB 'script'. (exit; why's apache and mod_perl
    gone?)
    mod_perl is in many many servers serving billions of requests per
    day.

    It's not a good fit for your average $5/month massively shared ISP
    hosting account so it's more often being used on bigger sites where
    it's amazingly successful. Maybe I'm operating in the wrong circles,
    but I often hear success stories and very rarely or never hear stories
    about how mod_perl didn't work well.


    - ask

    --
    ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
  • Pressio Main Email at Nov 16, 2004 at 12:19 am
    Totally agree with you bjorn,

    I was merely poking fun at my newbie error there (a mistake I made once
    on a dev box) and was no slight of mod_perl.

    I would use mod_perl by default on any web perl projects, the question for
    me became why on this blue marble I wouldn't use mod_perl? Doddle install,
    rocket performance, slam dunk.


    On a previous point, I should entertain the possibility that my perception
    of how much time it would take for me to learn perl properly may be wrong,
    since I've never done it!

    I have the greatest respect and admiration for the people who have made perl
    the success that it is and are building it's future.

    Perl enables others to get results in their lives. I can scarcely imagine
    the aggregate benefit to civilisation that is accumulating as a result.

    The world has enough nay-sayers with no plans for a better tomorrow, and I
    identify 100% with you people in opting to do something positive that makes
    the world a better place, creating and sharing something new and useful.

    I have quit my job after 21 years to cut out on my own. Once I have my
    financial future fortified i.e. my freedom won, there are lot's of things
    I want to do for the community, maybe because I was bullied at school I
    don't know, but in any event it's in step with my ethical aspirations.

    The perl community have my best wishes as a matter of principle, and
    I predict Perl is in my future, even if I don't get to use it myself.


    tom cowap
    dublin, ireland


    -----Original Message-----
    From: ask@miette.develooper.com On
    Behalf Of Ask Bjoern Hansen
    Sent: 07 November 2004 23:48
    To: advocacy@perl.org
    Subject: Re: Critique of Where Perl 6 is Heading


    pressio@pressio.com (Pressio Main Email) writes:

    [...]
    punctuation marks, and evening/weekend coders like me can gimp our way to
    eye-candy web pages with a 1MB 'script'. (exit; why's apache and mod_perl
    gone?)
    mod_perl is in many many servers serving billions of requests per
    day.

    It's not a good fit for your average $5/month massively shared ISP
    hosting account so it's more often being used on bigger sites where
    it's amazingly successful. Maybe I'm operating in the wrong circles,
    but I often hear success stories and very rarely or never hear stories
    about how mod_perl didn't work well.


    - ask

    --
    ask bjoern hansen, http://www.askbjoernhansen.com/ !try; do();
  • Jeff covey at Nov 9, 2004 at 1:40 am

    on Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 10:49:57PM -0700%, Randal L. Schwartz said:

    You are apparently not taking seriously anything that is being said
    that is critical of you. Your story above also argues for that. In
    fact, it says that Freshmeat is willing to publish any random
    half-thought-through opinion, which means that it's about as worthless
    as a blog.
    Ok, send me a rebuttal article, or ask someone you trust to do it.

    Sincerely,
    Jeff Covey
    freshmeat.net
  • Dan Brian at Nov 9, 2004 at 2:11 am

    You are apparently not taking seriously anything that is being said
    that is critical of you. Your story above also argues for that. In
    fact, it says that Freshmeat is willing to publish any random
    half-thought-through opinion, which means that it's about as worthless
    as a blog.
    Ok, send me a rebuttal article, or ask someone you trust to do it.
    You'll find that the lack of comments on this matter is indicative of a
    general feeling that a rebuttal is neither needed nor interesting. So I
    doubt you'll find anyone to write an article dissecting Fish's. ("No
    one understands p6", "p6 is not backwards-compatible", "p6 is too
    complex" are his central arguments. Fun.)

    Many of us — also not Perl gurus, CS wizards, or academians — do read
    and understand and enjoy the apocalypses. (Or, at least the exegeses.)
    And we look forward to p6 enhancing the rich world that is Perl, with
    all its shortcuts, nooks, crannies, and ever-evolving techniques and
    best practices. A more common sentiment is that we hope articles like
    Shlomi's do not discourage the progress of development, lest we miss
    out on the opportunity to embrace and explore this fantastic, and
    therefore necessarily ambitious, language/internals refresh.
  • Henning Møller-Nielsen at Nov 10, 2004 at 7:53 am

    -----Original Message-----
    From: jeff covey
    Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 2:40 AM
    To: advocacy@perl.org
    Subject: Re: Critique of Where Perl 6 is Heading

    on Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 10:49:57PM -0700%, Randal L. Schwartz said:
    You are apparently not taking seriously anything that is being said
    that is critical of you. Your story above also argues for that. In
    fact, it says that Freshmeat is willing to publish any random
    half-thought-through opinion, which means that it's about as worthless
    as a blog.
    Ok, send me a rebuttal article, or ask someone you trust to do it.

    Sincerely,
    Jeff Covey
    freshmeat.net
    I believe Michael Schwern already wrote something that counts as that, in the comments to Fish's original piece. It was on the site when I the thread was a couple of days old.

    /Henning
  • John Adams at Nov 10, 2004 at 3:02 pm

    On Nov 10, 2004, at 2:53 AM, Henning Møller-Nielsen wrote:

    -----Original Message-----
    From: jeff covey

    Ok, send me a rebuttal article, or ask someone you trust to do it.

    Sincerely,
    Jeff Covey
    freshmeat.net
    I believe Michael Schwern already wrote something that counts as that,
    in the comments to Fish's original piece. It was on the site when I
    the thread was a couple of days old.
    Is what Perl advocates say to each other what they want to say to the
    rest of the world?

    All the best,

    John A
    see me fulminate at http://www.jzip.org/

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupadvocacy @
categoriesperl
postedOct 16, '04 at 12:19p
activeNov 16, '04 at 12:19a
posts15
users11
websiteperl.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase