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
Or is it a BUG?"
"Let's call it an accidental feature. :-)"
--Larry Wall in <6909@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
Absolutely... (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm assuming there's a "not" missing there and, based on that assumption, I absolute agree.
I have trouble understanding the arguments against adopting a regular release schedule. The implication is that quality will suffer if releases are made based on the date rather than the readiness of the code - which would be true if the pumpking just bundled and shipped whatever was in the repo at that point in time - but that's not at all what's being proposed. And co-opting DarkPAN to endorse the current rele
Re: (Score:1)
> or even if it exists
I think it's fairly clear that it exists.
Re: (Score:1)
And also that there’s a lot of it. But it doesn’t get any more tangible than that.
And in reality the question is how to balance the needs of the past DarkPAN against the needs of the future DarkPAN. Also, how much past DarkPAN code is affected by the regressions of 5.10.0? It’s not one unknown pushing back; there’s an equally big unknown pushing forward that is rarely ever considered.
Re: (Score:1)
> But it doesn’t get any more tangible than that.
Except for the 50,000,000 lines of it identified here [ohloh.net].
Re:Absolutely… (Score:1)
That’s the GreyPAN (= open source Perl code that’s not on CPAN).
Reply to This
Parent