Undermining the Perl Language
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace it. I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content, but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy of the Perl community. Actually, I put it that way specifically to ruffle just the right feathers, in the hope that Larry might pick up on it. My apologies to the non-Perl-KGB-elite. I'm not known for tact. On a different, yet related issue: had there been a perl6-sociology list, I would have submitted the following: All newbies are not necessarily 'clueless newbies' That's a different but related issue. I was primarily addressing the issue of the P5P allowing the language to be controlled by corporate presence through a purchased pumking, and not taking responsibility for the language sufficient to protect it against corruption (technical and political), and choosing rather to follow the man rather than look where they're going. I've no idea why Sarathy was deposed, but I have a pretty big suspicion. The problem is, I love Sarathy too. He's a hero, now with a tarnished reputation, not necessarily solely because but definitely partially because, of a poor choice in employers. But I can't support the decisions that Sarathy made and why he made them. In order to address problems like "the premature release of Perl 5.6 when it wasn't nearly ready just to satisfy a Microsoft deadline", either a/the porters group needs to understand that they need to concentrate on the road and not on the leader, or we need a group that is capable or willing to do so. As for the "everybody but me is an idiot" mentality, I believe that is one of the main reasons that PHP and Python are gaining so much ground. In public fora, nobody cares if you use mIRC (example 1 of many). In #perl on efnet, unless you use BitchX on Solaris or something, you're an idiot, and can be banned for just using mIRC (which is why years ago I migrated to Pirch and now only go in under Linux). The elitist mentality is two-fold then. It affects both the core language, and the community. It harms the language by allowing its corruption, and destroys open support and advocacy. Do we still have time to make an RFC of some sort? And, if so, how could it be phrased? I would prefer (due specifically to my lack of tact) to have someone else write it, but I do have information that this person would need. I think that the P6 version of the P5P should be matched with a body to govern the politics of the language, whose members are elected and whose members may not be employees of known or confessed monopolists (or, more realistically, have no profit motive). If the monopolists want a voice in the politics, they should go through objective representatives, and not buy up the most influential porters to take control. Perl 6 is supposed to be made by and for the community. It can't satisfy that requirement and exist under the same oppression (or, minimally, negligence) that Perl 5 did. At what point in Perl5's history did it become politically (socially) incorrect to dislike Microsoft, and attempt to steer away from them and their allies, and other companies who use similar tactics to Microsoft's to take over? IIRC, it was July of 1998, when I erroneously coined the phrase "great perl merge", and Sarathy found a new job. Something's gotta budge. I do not want to pay for the privilege of using a free language, and the "elite" need a damn good spaking to learn some manners to newbies (for at least the sake of advocacy) and people who don't use their own OS/Computer/Platform. Python is nice (though a bit overcooked)? Perl is rude. Can't we all just get along? The little guy has to have a voice, or the big guys will stick it to them in the end. I've changed the subject, since we've tangented far enough to make a new one. We have actual issues other than a single person's little snit.
Re: Undermining the Perl Language
"David" == David Grove [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
David I was primarily addressing the issue of the P5P allowing the
David language to be controlled by corporate presence through a
David purchased pumking, and not taking responsibility for the
David language sufficient to protect it against corruption (technical
David and political), and choosing rather to follow the man rather
David than look where they're going. I've no idea why Sarathy was
David deposed, but I have a pretty big suspicion. The problem is, I
David love Sarathy too. He's a hero, now with a tarnished reputation,
David not necessarily solely because but definitely partially
David because, of a poor choice in employers. But I can't support the
David decisions that Sarathy made and why he made them. In order to
David address problems like "the premature release of Perl 5.6 when
David it wasn't nearly ready just to satisfy a Microsoft deadline",
David either a/the porters group needs to understand that they need
David to concentrate on the road and not on the leader, or we need a
David group that is capable or willing to do so.
Please take your paranoia elsewhere. I think if you actually sat down
and had lunch with each of the parties involved, and those further out
but well-informed, you'd find a consistent view of reality that
doesn't match ANY of your delusions.
No conspiracy could be that well-oiled. Someone would have leaked it
by now.
And consider the contrary for a moment... if this *is* a conspiracy
desgined to lock you out, what point would complaining about it do?
{grin}
To be a contribution to the community, you must have some higher
degree of trust than you are demonstrating. If you can't manage that
on your own, seek assistance elsewhere.
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!
Re: Undermining the Perl Language
Okay, followups to this belong in -meta (alas Eudora doesn't let you set reply-to's, or I would), so if everyone would, please? At 12:14 PM 10/1/00 -0500, David Grove wrote: On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace it. I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content, but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy of the Perl community. Actually, I put it that way specifically to ruffle just the right feathers, in the hope that Larry might pick up on it. My apologies to the non-Perl-KGB-elite. I'm not known for tact. Okay Dave (and *everyone* else) let me be *real* blunt. If you can't converse in a rational and courteous way, then *DON'T*. Maintaining a courteous and rational community is everyone's responsibility. *Everyone's*. You want the perl 6 development community to be pleasant? Then *be* *pleasant*. And privately deal with the people who aren't. There is *no one* in this community so important that they can behave badly. Nobody. Not you. Not me. Not even Larry. (You'll notice, though, that the people who have what pass for official titles in the p6 world all generally act like adults in public. I even manage most of the time) Damn it, people, we are all adults, or can at least fake it in public. And Dave? Do please keep your issues with perl 5 and ActiveState elsewhere. This isn't p5p. We don't even have software for you to have issues with yet. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
RE: Undermining the Perl Language
*All* communities have this. It's the nature of people. Pretending it might be otherwise is to paint a rather pleasant utopian fantasy that, unfortunately, can't exist. (At least not one that has people in it) It's one of the common failings of people involved in open source projects. Assuming that somehow people will magically be other than people is the fastest way for the perl 6 community to self-destruct. The fantasy is believing that it can't exist without even trying, sir. Or, at least, it's equally fantastic. The shame is that we lazily accept the fantasy that takes less effort to achieve... the one that takes no effort. This does point out the biggest issue the community has at the moment--there aren't enough calm, mature, rational folks weighing in to keep things as level as we might want. I'm not sure what to do about that, since it's both a tiring and thankless endeavor that tends to burn people out. Decisions that are acceptable to the general public and not just compromise between public and commerce are seldom if ever determined in committee. We have hundreds of years of political history to demonstrate that. This country (apologies to non-US citizens) was not founded on committee action, but on rebellion. Only a few citizens of this country know the names of the constitutional congress, but _most_ recognize the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. What is the first amendment? Who is the first person to sign the document? (This is an example, not a trivia quiz.) Until this language is out of danger from corporate entities trying to destroy it or take it over, or at least until the powers that _could_, actually _do_, there must be a voice crying "foul!". I love this language, and will do what I can to protect it. Right now, that means getting the attention of the people who could help the situation, and getting that in such a way that they cannot _but_ act appropriately toward the protection of this language. To comply with the wishes of the listmaster, please move this thread to perl6-meta.
Re: Undermining the Perl Language
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 11:49:51AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote: David I was primarily addressing the issue of the P5P allowing the David language to be controlled by corporate presence through a David purchased pumking, and not taking responsibility for the David language sufficient to protect it against corruption (technical David and political), and choosing rather to follow the man rather David than look where they're going. I've no idea why Sarathy was David deposed, but I have a pretty big suspicion. [...] Please take your paranoia elsewhere. I think if you actually sat down and had lunch with each of the parties involved, and those further out but well-informed, you'd find a consistent view of reality that doesn't match ANY of your delusions. To be a contribution to the community, you must have some higher degree of trust than you are demonstrating. If you can't manage that on your own, seek assistance elsewhere. FWIW, I agree entirely with Randal here. Tim.
