"I am talking about *officially* directing *funding* and man-power to this or similar projects which may have a + net-effect on establishing Perl, again"
"The distinction between officially spearheading a project/direction and individually or in groups creating CPAN modules must be clear even to a not-so-well-meaning observer."
How are you addressing any of your concerns that you raise? Who have you raised this with? Where is your proposal for a grant to fund this? A 'preference' without action or participation is unlikely to yield any positive results.
"My suggested experiment is a means to assess how much potential breaks and how much effort to fix them. I said "clone" because some modules will have to be modified in order to be "fixed" for the new version."
That's what the smoketesting of CPAN already does, contributes to the cpantesters data and reports failures. People report bugs, provide patches/PRs if they can. Without investigating the cause of failure, you can't estimate how long it will take to fix.
"10x is an ad-hoc multiplier to extrapolate the findings from code which has been peer-reviewed, tested and used under many circumstances by thousands (CPAN modules)"
Where is this peer-review occurring? How is this 10x relevant? You can't have thought about all of the factors involved in determining severity, or if the failure even needs to be addressed.
In reply to Re^4: Announcing Perl 7
by marto
in thread Announcing Perl 7
by marto
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |