in reply to Re^2: Current posting ability limitations (interim)
in thread Current posting ability limitations

But your interim approach would be ...

When you put it that way, I guess not.

S'the trouble with invisible code-bases, observers can only guess as to what might be easy to implement.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
  • Comment on Re^3: Current posting ability limitations (interim)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Current posting ability limitations (interim)
by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 10, 2011 at 04:42 UTC

    You’re lucky it is invisible. A good glance at the modified Everything engine can cost you a visit to the ophthalmologist. I keed, I keed! But really, it’s not fun to look at.

    I regret nnnnnnoooooooot as much as one might expect.

[reply]

      Maybe its time we re-write the site. In aXML?

      (Geez! Some people just have no sense of humour!)

      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

        Gah! Blowing a cup of coffee through your nose is a painful way to start your day. I guess I shouldn't be drinking when I read posts, only when I'm replying to them.

        Good one BrowserUk!

        ...roboticus

        When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.

[reply]

      I certainly would be interested in getting my hands on the PM code. Mostly for personal reasons: I'm wondering how much work it would actually be to convert all the PM data into a modern database layout with completly new, modernized codebase.

      For the last couple of months i have been thinking about that problem. Seems like a lot of work. But what i really want to know: Is it actually possible? Would i be able to do it? I bet i can, but i have to prove it (to myself, mostly).

      You know, "never set your goals to low" and that stuff ;-)

      Don't use '#ff0000':
      use Acme::AutoColor; my $redcolor = RED();
      All colors subject to change without notice.
[reply]

        Your intuition is correct: it would be a lot of work. But I have some observations to offer you which I believe should add some perspective on the problem:

        One one hand, the database schema of user-posted nodes is relatively clean and straightforward. If you wanted to create an entirely new site without necessarily any feature compatility with this one, but with a starting nodebase of PerlMonks' existing user-posted nodes, you could conceivably do that without much work, I think. (Issues of user accounts and node ownership aside.)

        On the other hand, if your intent was to re-implement the functional features of PerlMonks, more or less, you'd face a prodigious amount of work. And there is a certain terra incognita of features available only to the gods which, unless you got one of them to join in your project, you'd just have to reinvent to your own liking. (That is to say, even pmdev don't have access to the code of those features.)

        Nonetheless, I have it in mind to create a "new PerlMonks" using Perl 6, doing a lot of things differently based on "lessons learned" from the experiences here, but preserving as much as possible the foundational philosophies of this site. See New PerlMonks for Perl 6 - A Good Idea

        I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion