good stuff... gruber's an asshole, as far as I can tell. best, Joe On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Tomas Doran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 15 Mar 2008, at 02:55, John Gruber wrote: > > > On Feb 28, 2008, at 12:34 PM, Tomas Doran wrote: > > > >> I'm actively maintaining the CPAN modules Text::Markdown, and > >> Text::MultiMarkdown, and longer term, I'd like these to become the > >> canonical distribution. > > > > I despise what you've done with Text::Markdown, which is to more or > > less make it an alias for MultiMarkdown, almost every part of which > > I disagree with in terms of syntax additions. > > > > Wow, that's pretty strong language. I'm glad I'm provoking strong > opinions, and it's nice to see you actively contributing to > Markdown's direction ;) > > Personally, I don't actually like (or use) the MultiMarkdown > extensions. As noted several times on list (http://six.pairlist.net/ > pipermail/markdown-discuss/2008-March/001100.html and others), I *do > not* consider what I've done to in any way be a good solution > technically / internally in it's current form, and as such > Markdown.pl is still a better 'reference' implementation. > > However I find it somewhat ironic that you can criticise an active > effort to actually move Markdown forwards (who's current flaws have > been publicly acknowledged), when it passes more of your test suite > than your effort does, and when you haven't even been bothered to > update your own website about the project since 2004, despite having > updated the code which can be found on your site (if you dig) much > more recently than this. > > Don't get me wrong - the internals of the code I'm publishing are > *shockingly nasty*, and I *am currently* refactoring so that > Text::Markdown is a standalone implementation (with just the original > Markdown feature set), that Text::MultiMarkdown builds upon. I will > also shortly be providing a Markdown.pl that works for command line > usage and also does the MT and bloxom plugin magic. > > At that point my implementation will be less buggy (by your test > suite), faster and more compatible with recent perl versions than any > version of the 'original' Markdown.pl. I also plan to (eventually) > produce a Text::MarkdownExtra which adds those extensions, but I plan > to do it from the same codebase, in some way that is less grotty than > having a load (more) 'turn feature X off' switches. > > The code I have at the moment, is, however a step along the road, and > was the most pragmatic thing to do in the short term to un-fuck and > update both modules. > > I despise copy-pasted code, and forks for no (real) reason - seeing > *another two* dead copies of the same code on CPAN made me sad, and > so I've done *something* to take the situation forwards. Maybe if > you'd put the effort into maintaining a community and taking > Markdown.pl forwards at any time within the last 4 years, you > wouldn't be in a situation where people have taken 'your baby' and > perverted it to a point that you despise. If starting with > Markdown.pl and going forwards with that *had been an option*, then > that would have been my preferred route - but I didn't see any value > in producing what would have been a **fifth** perl Markdown > implementation. > > Cheers > Tom > > (http://svn.kulp.ch/cpan/text_multimarkdown/branches/ > splitcode_unshell_Text-Markdown/lib/Text/Markdown.pm is where I am > now, more stuff needs fixing / pulling apart to be able to do > Text::MultiMarkdown without so much c&p code) > > > _______________________________________________ > Markdown-Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss >
-- Joseph Lorenzo Hall UC Berkeley School of Information http://josephhall.org/ _______________________________________________ Markdown-Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
