My apologies, I missed this message. The list volume is a bit high so
I had to subscribe to the digest and that has limited my involvement.
On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 3:36 AM, Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org> wrote:
> Hi Robot,
>
> Understanding your points, correlating them to past decisions, calling up
> what the decisions actually were and their reasons, finding out which of
> these reasons were good and which were bad - that's already a pretty taxing
> task.
>
I was trying to ask questions about work that, I hope, had aIready
been done. If not, then to me that says decisions were made without
clear forethought.
> Now if you start out with a dismissive attitude such as "The Build System is
> Ridiculous" and continuing with a rant in the message is going to make it
> attractive to answer in a likewise fashion.
> Such an answer wouldn't be constructive, so most community members will
> simply ignore your posting. (Some will ignore you just because they're
> annoyed. We're just humans after all.)
> The result is that you probably already lost a lot of help in fixing the
> issues you'd like to see fixed.
>
A developer has already questioned the validity of modern
cryptography. I no longer have high hopes for Perl 6. Others do not
either, mostly due to concerns about why Perl 6 is so divorced from
Perl 5 and general misgivings about the development lifecycle of the
project so far.
It's unfortunate the message was seen as a rant. I intended it to be
coherent and fairly concise. Sadly from my point of view no one was
able to answer what I hoped to be simple questions about why things
were the way they were.
I wasn't even going to dispute anything offered, for the most part, I
simply wanted some kind of context.
> Disclaimer: I'm more a bystander than an active Perl6 community member.
> This has the advantage of being somewhat impartial (in a limited fashion, I
> found to my own surprise - I was annoyed myself and had to reign that in);
> it has the disadvantage of not really knowing how other community members
> will react, I'm just going out on assumptions there.
>
> I hope I'm helping; please assume I didn't write anything if I'm not.
>
I think you are. I did not mean to be unfriendly, but I was kind of
annoyed after failing, repeatedly, to get Rakudo Star to build. This
is the fourth or fifth project I have encountered that is extremely
hard to bootstrap.
Cheers,
R0b0t1
