(moved to -meta)
Karl Glazebrook writes:
> > > Yes. And for the record I also think the current approach of lets
> > > generate ten million RFCs and Uncle Larry knows best is nuts.
> > > There are already too many RFCs on this topic alone to grasp coherently.
> > Do you have a better suggestion?
>
> subgroups should iron out there differences among themselves and come up
> with a coherent set of proposals.
I think it's pretty obvious that many people don't have the language
design skills do this. We have a lot of people who are making
suggestions, but I'll start programming in Python if they're making
decisions about what goes into Perl. (That's bluntly stated and
perhaps harsh, but I certainly feel that mob rule is very unwise in
this case).
I'm all for taking proposals on a particular subject (e.g., the PDL
multidim matrix suggestions, or the lvalue subs suggestions) and
giving the list a week to boil them down to one RFC that recommends an
implementation and says what was rejected and why.
> the final decision should not be in the hands of one person.
I can't imagine this happening. Perl's been well-served by Larry's
taste and design sense, and (especially given the huge number of ideas
and the diversity of thought that has gone into them :-) I
(personally) would be wary of turning over some or all of the reins to
anyone else.
Nat
