Adam Turoff wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 10:22:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I was wondering if anyone else has run into the kind of negative feedback
> > recently that I have seen following the news of a major rewrite of Perl. I
> > am with a systems integrator. I work primarily with VLDB -- designing and
> > building CRM/ERM systems. I spoke a few times at the annual Perl conference
> > about how to get Perl accepted into large corporate IT shops.
> >
> > In the last two weeks two clients, whom I had managed to convince to use
> > Perl more broadly throughout their companies in the last few years, each
> > independently sent me some frantic email asking me to describe whether the
> > rewrite was a good or bad thing. One of the two clients, a large bank, is
> > considering moving away from Perl out of fear of lack of stability and
> > problems with backward compatibility. Large IT shops like to move in very
> > small increments generally.
>
> Message #1: Perl5 isn't going away, even after Perl6 is released.
>
> Proof: Perl4 is still around.
Doesn't help this need. Perl4 is unsupported. I think the important
message should be that Perl5 is still supported, which is far beyond
just "not going away". And we can say "and it still will be until Perl6
is completely solid, post 6.0."
The burning question for many people is "if a fatal security-breaching
worldshaking idiotic painful bug is uncovered, will everyone be too busy
working on Perl6 to fix it?"
