Re^2: Why Change?

As for "wrong path", it might be a key indicator that almost every person with a significant CPAN presence is heavily in favor of Perl6 and the way it's being developed. This also includes every single person who's ever done any work with the Perl5 source (save one, that I'm aware of).

That's a very strong claim. Also wrong. For a very prominent and vocal exception see Abigail. For another person with qualms, see Adam Kennedy. If you follow that link you will see comments from brian d. foy indicating that he has qualms as well. None of those are exceptions that you really want to ignore. Nor, based on a number of conversations that I have, would I say that they are particularly uncommon.

Now you're free to disagree with these people. Many do. But it is wrong to claim that they do not exist.

Incidentally in an unrelated note, should I resign myself to never getting the apology I requested some time ago?

Comment on Re^2: Why Change?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Why Change? by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Apr 08, 2008 at 13:23 UTC
Abigail was the person I was thinking of. "qualms" doesn't preclude "heavily in favor". I know brian's got reservations, as do I, but I haven't heard anything from brian regarding not supporting Perl6. I also remember talking with Adam about his qualms, but I thought most of them had been addressed. Granted, this was YAPC::NA::2006, so I could be out of date. The point still remains, even if I may overstated it a bit. The Perl5 devs and CPAN authors, as a group, are heavily in favor of how Perl6 is progressing, both in terms of deliverables and and in terms of process. If you want, I would be delighted to take a poll on the matter. As for apology, there is nothing to apologize for. We had a discussion. You feel strongly one way and I feel strongly another. We've had these several times over the past 6+ years we've known each other. If you feel there's something I need to apologize for, I would be honored to discuss it via email - rkinyon@cpan.org My criteria for good software: Does it work? Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?	[reply]
Re^4: Why Change? by tilly (Archbishop) on Apr 08, 2008 at 23:58 UTC
Note that the blog I pointed to for Adam was from 2008. So yes, your 2006 discussion is somewhat out of date. In the discussion at the link I gave he was told the proposed solution for his issue. He made it clear that he understands that that's the plan but he'll be a lot happier about it after he sees it happen. Which I take to mean that he's a little dubious that things will work out like the plan says. Frankly I'm in the same boat. A poll is unnecessary. If you want to make comments about "most", I won't dispute it one way or another. I don't have an opinion on that. It is only when you try to project the impression of virtually complete unanimity that I'll react. As for the apology, let's not bother taking this further. Past bad experiences have convinced me that if conversation in public goes poorly, then conversation in private will be even worse. If you don't think that you wish to apologize for saying "you keep ignoring this point" when I had, in fact, addressed it repeatedly then that is your choice. About that other thread. You seem to believe that we were discussing a matter of opinion rather than a matter of fact. As long as you keep that basic misconception, you're unlikely to question your assumptions about the world deeply enough to reconsider your beliefs. (I do not say that lightly. I try to be extremely careful to keep clear on the distinction between fact and belief.) As far as I'm concerned, this discussion is at an end. Unless you say something startlingly new, I won't reply to any replies.	[reply]
Re^3: Why Change? by jdporter (Paladin) on Apr 08, 2008 at 12:49 UTC
That's a very strong claim. Also wrong. I agree 100%. Thank you for making the point. should I resign myself to never getting the apology I requested some time ago? I sympathize, but take it offline. A word spoken in Mind will reach its own level, in the objective world, by its own weight	[reply]


Don't ask to ask, just ask
	PerlMonks