On Thursday, August 15, 2002, at 11:04 , Ken Williams wrote:
[..]
>> I could imagine if the scripts were 'verbose' in themselves
>> by doing the actual assertion
>>
>> #!/usr/bin/perl5.6.1 -w
>> use strict;
>
> Yeah, that's how I'd do it. The advantage is that you can see precisely
> which scripts are using which versions.
p0: my compliments!
sick, twisted and disturbed.....
{ all qualities I desire in IT professionals! }
I honestly do tip my hat to you - since if you have the
stones to make that commitment - then you have clearly
thought out your plays!
{ to be honest, I had been kidding.... since that
violates some 'cardinal' rule.... }
p1: Should I presume that you 'devolve' code to the
#!/usr/bin/perl
if and only if you know that it is generic enough????
Or only go there if and when you plan to distribute
the code to others???
p2: My concern now moves to the 'problem' that if OSX 10.2
is going to ship with perl 5.8 by 'default' - then you have
the canonical 'upgrade' problem here - IF there isn't a
'backward build out' of the perl 5.6.1 on your new servers...
Or should we presume that you have the development team
working on 5.8 for 10.2 as soon as they are available to
the apple developers - hence doing your beta with beta???
p3: So while your argument can be misinterpreted
as opposed to 'total quality control' - with the usual
evolution of code
developer -> qa -> customer
that you have processes in place to deal with the 'time
to market' problem in a rational and replicatable manner?
ciao
drieux
---
sub_text - myFascistHouseMate blitzed all the 'old'
versions of perl off of vladimir - I mean I had an
original perl4.035 there - granted it was compiled for
a CPU architecture we no longer have... but... I could
have 'rolled back' in case this new perl5 stuff didn't take....
8-)
