Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I contact the guy that did the PXPerl distro. It is really good already but he is a student looking for money. Hopefully he will apply and be accepted. []
    • Hi, I am the author of PXPerl. I'm indeed interested in this. I am going to (re-)write a proposal to TPF. Perhaps I'll be more successful this time :)
      • Are you planning on resubmitting for PXPerl, or attacking this by starting from Vanilla and going from there.

        Because in trying to work on PXPerl's build stuff, before we had to abandon it and look for fresh approachs, I was getting comments that some of it was doing some very crazy and evil thing.

        One of the key points of my challenge to find a replacement for PXPerl was that it had to be reproducable. Someone else needed to be able to come along and keep maintaining it, so that we didn't suffer from the ris
        • I am completely aware of what PXPerl is lacking: everything is made by hand and that's definitely not convenient nor contributable nor reproducable. But when I started PXPerl, I just didn't want to start another more ambitious project that I would forsake 2 months later, unfinished.
          The current drawback is that, justly, practically no one can contribute to it, and anyway I don't want to because it's way too crafty (and I am curious about your "evil" thing... I haven't had such feedback).

          Given that, I started
          • I believe some of the comments I got mentioned some really ugly hardcoded build paths, that might it very difficult to even reverse engineer the improvements to it.

            I wouldn't be too surprised that you didn't hear, the rule of complaints is that you only ever hear 1 out of 10 in any case, and I don't know of more than 3 or 4 people that looked at the internals.

            PXPerl certainly helped I think, there's nothing like having a prize laid out before you, almost completed, and then have it snatched away, to drive people to industriousness.

            I believe someone linked to the grant procedure above, but generally it is NOT based on market rates. The amount you ask for it intended to be based on what you would need to complete the task.

            Since the point of this is to have someone working full(ish) time on this to help drive the completion, I imagine you'd be asking for what you think you need in order to do that.

            As long as the grant amount stays within the $5,000 limit, and is commensurate to your needs, I don't think the grant committee are going to be voting based on penny-pinching.

            Certainly if one person was asking for $4,000 for two months, and the other was asking for $500, I'd be asking if the latter isn't just fooling themselves, and might abandon the work.

            They are less concerned about a few dollars, rather than the person will actually execute, and that they are not going to pull out. They want results, not a lower headline figure. And they'll approve whoever they think is the most likely to deliver.