The only thing that I would suggest to the Perl-6 team is:   “don’t call it Perl-6.”   It may well be a language that is source-code backward compatible with Perl-5, but I am of the opinion that quite clearly it is best described as a new language development effort, and I believe that this is how it should be professionally presented.

Furthermore, I have no problems with this notion.   If a “new language” that is built from Perl, and that is meant to be a successor to what Perl has begun, seems good to enough engineers, then let it be so.   I do look forward to it, with considerable interest.   But let us, if but for the sake of clarity, give it a new name.   (Most unfortunately, and perhaps not coincidentally, “camel” seems to be taken ...)