On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:39:27 -0500, J. David Blackstone wrote:
> If enough people really feel that worried about Perl falling into
>the hands of a few, then something like this might be a good idea.
I am quite happy with Perl as it is now, so having no say in how it
should evolve, doesn't really worry me. I'll most likely stay happy with
Perl.
>However, if Microsoft or whoever were to somehow
>to gain total control of Perl, couldn't somebody just go off and
>create a Perl-compatible p*rl, according to the GPL and/or Artistic
>License?
Now there is something that, at least slightly, worries me. I don't
think that "the Real Perl" should *ever* need to go search fo a new
name. Such hostile takeovers should simply be impossible. That's why I
like the fact that Laryy remains in absolute control.
--
Bart.
- Re: Continued RFC process Nathan Wiger
- Re: Continued RFC process Will Coleda - IMG
- RE: Continued RFC process Bryan C . Warnock
- RE: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- RE: Continued RFC process Dave Storrs
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- RE: Continued RFC process Andy Dougherty
- RE: Continued RFC process Ask Bjoern Hansen
- Re: Continued RFC process J. David Blackstone
- Re: Continued RFC process John Porter
- Re: Continued RFC process Bart Lateur
- Re: Continued RFC process J. David Blackstone
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Stephen Zander
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process Tad McClellan
- Re: Continued RFC process Dan Sugalski
- Re: Continued RFC process John Porter
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- RE: Continued RFC process David Grove
- Re: Continued RFC process Peter Buckingham
