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.
  • Weren't you the guy just taking a big dump on the list? Why not list all the things that you dump on (including use.perl, which you suggested should be taken over by force)? So, when are you going to stop taking big dumps?

    So what if people dump on ideas? It's better than telling people that public debate is forbidden. Perhaps you just don't like open discussion and freedom.

    • For anyone else reading this, if you take any of brian's assertions seriously and are concerned about them, please let me know and I'll refute each. Otherwise, I'll let this lie.


      • I’d just like links to the relevant archived message so I can form my own opinion.

      • Someone sent me a chat transcript from August 26, although I asked Pudge about this today and he says the suggestion was never that serious:

        michaelschwern: One proposition was for someone to propose to take over maintenance of use.perl from pudge.
        Andy Lester: But all this gets back to my original premise
        Andy Lester: of where are people to do shit?
        michaelschwern: ?
        Andy Lester: OK, so say we in this room says "Let's overhaul"
        Andy Lester: Who's going to do it?

        As for the other thing I mentioned sta

        • I read the whole thread. Andy's first post was terse but I would not call it a dump and it did foster other talk of which Andy took part and did not dump. I don't see the point here. Not being involved in the, I would agree with Andy's posts. Especially when you read the second one was created because "Perl lunch" notices were bouncing. After that Andy gave another good suggestion of creating a "social" list for things of that sort under

          I read it all and I didn't see dumping.


        • OK, I'm very confused. I know and like both you and Andy, so perhaps that doesn't help, but I read that thread and I didn't see any dumping. You have two lists for the Chicago area. Andy doesn't think that makes sense and others disagree. Of course, your definition of "dumping" could be considerably different from my own and even if our definitions were the same, the criteria could be subjective enough that we still couldn't agree.

    • However "dumping" and exchanging ideas on something are totally different things.

      "I am not sure why you did this could you fill me in?" is much better than "You did what? That sucks and you are stupid for doing it!". Even if after you get the explanation and don't agree you can still say "I see what you did but I don't think it will work."

      So the Perl community should foster an exchange of ideas and polite discourse and discourage "dumping".

      I don't know any of the "background" issues that caused the article
      • I agree with you. same goes to lines like:

        "why do you write this module when there are dozen of them on CPAN do the same thing. stop wasting your time."

        that's the sorta thing discourages people to innovate and invent something better.