Damian (>), Carl (>>):
>> Partly that is because documentation isn't at the forefront of things
>> that need to be implemented for Perl 6 to be useful, so it's kind of
>> lagging behind the rest.
>> Partly it's because Damian is the "owner" of that synopsis, and he
>> practices a kind of "drive-by-updating" to it. As a case in point of
>> this latter effect, the extensive changes made by Damian in August
>> *still* haven't hit the Pugs repo.
> The latter is entirely true but, fortunately, also very easily remedied.
> I hereby disclaim all present and future "ownership" of S26. :-)

Thank you.

I do want to stress that I, despite my doubts and criticisms in this
thread, appreciate all the time and effort you've put into S26. It is
*because* I want the best for that synopsis that I brought up the
above. Whether the ownership thing was actual or perceived -- and your
email indicates the latter -- it did put S26 very much outside of the
flow of piecemeal improvements that we take for granted in the other
spec files.

> By all means put the latest update on the repo (or maybe remove S26
> entirely), and start redesigning it collaboratively.

I now put the latest update on the repo.

> Please note that I am not in any way upset, angry, petulant, or
> otherwise disaffected. I only want the very best for every aspect of
> Perl 6. If the experience of respected and active developers suggests
> that Pod 6 isn't a step in the right direction, I can only feel
> disappointed in myself, apologize for my failure, and gratefully turn
> the task over to those with better ideas and more time and energy to
> devote to the problem.

Again, thanks for your efforts so far. The discussions over the years
have shown at least me what an ungrateful task it is to be redesigning
Pod for Perl 6.

// Carl

Reply via email to