On Wednesday 30 August 2006 23:03, brian d foy wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aleksandar > > Petrovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:22:33 +0200, brian d foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > In article > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gabor > > > > > > Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Can someone explain me why is the source code of learn.perl.org (and > > >> the other *.perl.org site) not publicly accessible? > > > > > > Sure it's acessible. That's how you get to see it. When you view the > > > site. you're downloading the source. > > > > Is this supposed to be funny? You know what they ment. > > I in no way intended it to be funny or light. I fyou have a change, > send it in. Complaining about not having the source is no an excuse for > not sending changes.
Well, sure. Here's my first change: 1. Add a button to the top saying "Online Tutorials". 2. Add the following HTML at the page pointed to it: http://www.shlomifish.org/perl-tutorials.html.wml I'll be waiting for it to be applied before I send my next change. Now why do I need the source? 1. So I can use subversion to manage it. 2. So I can work with the templates and send diffs against them. 3. So I can make sure the site works fine on my home machine. 4. So *you'll* have less work to do. > > And, most likely, Shlomi having the source is not going to make his > situation any better. That's the fortune teller error. > He has his own site. He can do whatever he wants > there. I know, which I am doing. Still I would like to see learn.perl.org improved too. And if perl-begin is in ship-shape but no one is aware of it, then what has the wise men helped with their ruling? > He doesn't have to destroy what other people are doing. Why am I going to "destroy" what other people are doing? I've only asked for access to the source so I and other people can send patches against it, not commit access. So the maintainers of the site can prevent any "destruction" I send in their way from being applied. > He has a > social problem that he's making worse, and there's no reason to expect > anyone to want to deal with him. How does that has anything to do with my criticism against learn.perl.org and my offer to help make it better? And if you ask me (and other people on this list), at the moment, the disqualifier disqualifies based on his own defects. > > Plenty of other people have made things for the community without any > sort of blessing or hostile take-over of another site. I don't wish to do a hostile take-over of learn.perl.org - I want to help improve it. Regards, Shlomi Fish --------------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish [EMAIL PROTECTED] Homepage: http://www.shlomifish.org/ Chuck Norris wrote a complete Perl 6 implementation in a day but then destroyed all evidence with his bare hands, so no one will know his secrets.
