Hi Ron (and all), thanks for your willingness to contribute to Graph-Easy. I'm CCing this message to the module-authors mailing list and to Tels, who is the originator of http://search.cpan.org/dist/Graph-Easy/ . Everybody, Ron has commented on my blog.
On Monday 14 Mar 2011 23:32:20 LiveJournal Comment wrote: > Somebody replied to a LiveJournal post > (http://community.livejournal.com/shlomif_tech/57021.html) in which Shlomi [SNIPPED] > Their reply was: > > Subject: The future of Graph::Easy > > Hi Shlomi > > I hear your plea for a co-maint for Graph::Easy. Before volunteering I'd > like to discuss a few issues. OK. > > I didn't see a mailing list for the module, so perhaps reply to my email > address, which is at the bottom of my home page http://savage.net.au > unless you think a better forum is available. There isn't a mailing list for Graph-Easy AFAIK. I did find your E-mail at http://savage.net.au/ , but it was using this markup: <img src="/assets/images/local/email-address.png" alt="Email address" /> This is an accessibility and usability problem. See what I've written about it here: * http://www.shlomifish.org/meta/FAQ/#obscure_email_addr * http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.717364.8 > > o I only used Graph::Easy for the first time last week. > > o I have the time and ability to work on it, but the implementation > intimidates me too, after reading a lot of the code :-(. > > o I don't have a background in graphing. > > o I do have a lot of modules on CPAN. > > o The pure-Perl tag is very appealing for sure, but if there's a better > tool out there, let's adopt it. My philosophy is that my OS is Debian > (not pure-Perl), and my favourite db is Postgres (likewise), etc, so > pure-Perl does not blind me to alternatives. Well, perl 5 has a lot of code written in C so it's not pure-Perl either. Still, unless there is a very big performance problem that people need, I think we can keep it as Perl. > > Issues: > > o Should the current parser be maintained? Reluctance is a problem. > I don't have a problem with it being rewritten. It's up to the maintainer. I haven't inspected the parser too much. > o Should the current parser be re-written? My time and skills are not a > problem, but reluctance is. Especially if a better tool is available. > I'm not aware of any. > o Should we switch to Parse::RecDescent? I can't tell. > Well, I had a bad experience with Parse::RecDescent, and, as most Damianware, it tends to have an amazing functionality but be overly smart and complicated, and tends to accumulate many bugs that are not dealt with. There are other parser generators available on CPAN. Recently I became interested in http://search.cpan.org/dist/Parser-MGC/ , but it's too bad the main POD contains too few meaningful examples. > o Should we switch to a non-Perl package? I don't have the breadth of > knowledge to tell. Non-Perl package? Why do you want to include XS (or whatever) code there? > > o I understand switching would possibly mean abandoning various things > such as specific output formats or some layout control. Why? Regards, Shlomi Fish -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ My Public Domain Photos - http://www.flickr.com/photos/shlomif/ I used to be arrogant. Now I'm simply Perfect. -- one of Shlomi Fish's relatives. Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
