Being developped for three years means nothing - Perl6 has been in development for almost 10 years now.
I'm not sure what you mean by "household names", but I don't think that I can ask my mother about any Moose-using-Perl company and get a set of answers that contains any of the names you seem to have in mind.
I guess that we're both aware of many things whose theoretical foundations go back far longer than 30 years and that still are not a good idea.
I question Mooses provenness because it's simply too young and while using it, I've seen that it's nice conceptually but doesn't buy me much over plain objects. I see it much like the Inside-Out fad that produced a slew of bad prerequisites and little else.
Of course it's always questionable to use a fancy new technology for a mission critical part.
In reply to Re^3: looking for a OR-mapper for Moose
by Corion
in thread looking for a OR-mapper for Moose
by morgon
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |