"John van V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ben Tilly Wrote:
> > But as I have said before, I have no problems with 5.6.0
> > having been released when it was.
>I work in a 16 trillion dollar settlement environment.  5.5.4/5.6 has
>broken a lot of administrative tools.

Did you blindly roll it out?

There comes a point where a project has done all of the
internal testing it is likely to do and needs to have
it tested in wider release.  IMO perl 5.6.0 was not
out of line as such a release.  However that release
should be regarded by all wise people as potentially
broken and timely bug fixes are required.

However as Perl goes through the spectrum from testing
to release significant bugs should result in a few point
releases until there is an acceptable release out there.
5.6.0 is not acceptable for that second release.

Release early, release often, and admit to your

>You do the math.

I looked at the situation and where I work no Perl 5.6
stuff has been installed.  Upon my advice.  Nor will it
be until there is a release out there which has sat for
at least a month without any bugs that I consider

Speaking personally the Perl 5.6.0 disaster (and I
consider it no less) has made me a lot more cynical
about Perl and willing to look at switching languages.
I do not currently know whether I will make the Perl 5
to Perl 6 transition...

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

Reply via email to