Well, THAT was certainly specific, insightful, politely phrased, and
filled with pertinent advice on how to remedy the problem!
Alan, you're right about certain things...it's important that talented,
experienced people have the final say over the final product. However,
most of the problems in
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Closed-for-posting mailing lists that are publically readable is the
best suggestion we've had to meet these ends so far.
Anyone have better suggestions?
I don't know that this is _better_, but...perhaps we could have
the lists that
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Steve Fink wrote:
David Grove wrote:
Also, as far as documentation goes, I think it _should_ be written by
apprentices, so that non-masters can understand it too. That's always been
Except it's a particular duty that nobody really likes to perform. Which
by using such inflammatory language...it makes me
(and probably others) focus more on your tone than on your point.
Dave Storrs
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Dave Storrs writes:
SARCASM=EXTREME
Everyone, please try to stop the downhill descent of the conversation.
This is not just Dave, but others in the thread too.
For the record, the original post in this sequence came from David
Hmmm...ok, on thinking about it, I generally agree with you.
There is only one point that I would debate (and, as you'll see, there's
a solution for that one, too):
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Nathan Torkington wrote:
Dave Storrs writes:
1) One of the great strengths of Perl
