On Thu, 14 Sep 2000, Steve Fink wrote:
Alan Burlison wrote:
Having done so I have been very happy to see the wide consensus
that seems to be appearing.
Huh? I'd say quite the opposite. I expected more. There are many, many
people who use perl. Anybody who uses anything will come up with
J. David Blackstone writes:
Wait. Does a good idea have to go away simply because the person
who originally proposed it no longer has interest? What if several
people are interested, but the original author has totally skipped out
on Perl6 development, and the other interested people
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
Nathan Torkington wrote:
Thanks for that grim view, Alan. I've been looking around for someone
to act as the Devil's Advocate and say what might go wrong, so I was
happy to see this.
Glad to be of service ;-)
I agree that the current brainstorming is chaotic. I feel like that's
the
On Sun, Sep 10, 2000 at 09:58:14PM +0100, Alan Burlison wrote:
I don't believe in magic. I'm an engineer by profession, not an
astrologer. However, I will predict endless arguments when some of the
less than coherent proposals are rejected.
The RFC process was intended to bring out both
