Thomas Wittek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> An other acceptable solution would be to create a backwards
> compatible P6 and create a new with an all new
> interface, like Mark suggested. But then this new module cannot
> profit of the popularity of the name "" and many people will
> say "Ah, Perl6 web development is stuck at the 10 years old Perl5
> interface. I'll use (python|ruby( on rails)?|.+)". That would
> be sad.

IMHO even Perl people like me will think "Ah, Perl6 web development is
stuck at the 10 years old Perl5 interface" just *because* of
the name, regardless of a changed internal api.

I would strongly expect the CGI module to do the same as it did for
the last 200 years and create another name for any new school web
development. Catalyst, Jifty, Acme, Acyou, SillyIdol, WhatEver.

The name "CGI" smells like, erm, yes, C...G...I. If RoR would have
sold itself with "CGI" in its name, it hadn't been that successful. In
mankind's history, everything *not* named CGI had a chance to success,
even PHP. It will be impossible to resurrect a hype around the word
"CGI". Because of the word. Not the api.

IMHO. Of course. :-)

Steffen Schwigon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dresden Perl Mongers <>

Reply via email to