Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Jarkko Hietaniemi]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 11:48:27PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:57:02PM -0500, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
> > Particularly after this:
> > 
> > http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html?tag=ltnc
> 
> "Innovation-- you keep using this word, I do not think it means what
> you think it means."

Quite simple, really.

Innovation, n.  Any technology that can be called new (regardless of
whether it is new) so that it can be added to the marketing material
of our products and therefore result in more money for our Leader.
-- Microsoft Encarta Dictionary, internal edition

-- 
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[David Grove]

 >
http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html?t

 > ag=ltnc

I wish I could think of something commensurate to say. I don't think I've
ever seen this much cockamamey horseradish on a single sheet of
cyberpaper. The most absurd part of it is that the bastages actually have
the umphness to pull off this much FUD, and that there is a majority of
moronity out there to actually get wooly eyed. Of course, I realize this
was posted to be rhetorical, but...

GRRR HS!

Good to see that Corel gave up their nonsense of trying to take over Linux
tho. I hadn't heard that. In 99 I was having nightmares of WP 5.1 coming
back to Linux as "the New EMACS".

p

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[schwern]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 08:57:02PM -0500, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
> Particularly after this:
> 
> http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html?tag=ltnc

"Innovation-- you keep using this word, I do not think it means what
you think it means."

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Bryan C . Warnock]

On Tuesday 13 February 2001 21:32, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> David L. Nicol writes:
> > Is there a budget?  Apprenticeship makes all kinds of sense when
> > there is actually a money flow into the guild; the carrot of eventual
> > credentials is too weak for me and many lesser poetasters.  
> > 
> > Could O'Reilly and Microsoft divert some funds to actually paying people
> > for helping out?  That would change the ball game something massive
> 
> I can't speak the final word for O'Reilly, but I can say that we're
> already paying Larry's salary and have basically told him that
> his most important job is Perl6.  Until that shows fruit, we'd be
> very unlikely to tip more money in the way of perl6.
> 
> Good luck getting blood from a ston^W^W^W^W money from Microsoft :-)

Particularly after this:

http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html?tag=ltnc


-- 
Bryan C. Warnock
bwarnock@(gtemail.net|capita.com)

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists (04--11 Feb 2001)

[Simon Cozens]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 10:11:33AM -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the magic address;
> 
> -digest has a specific meaning with many mailing list managers. I
> would suggest calling it perl6-summaries or such to avoid confusion.

Yuh, I thought of that the second after telling the boys to set it up.
However, it parallels the perl5-porters list, which is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
We use ezmlm, anyway, which doesn't care about the -summaries thing. And I've
announced it now, and people have been subscribing so I think it would cause
more confusion to change it. 

-- 
fga is frequently given answers... the best are "Date::Calc", "use a hash",
and "yes, it's in CPAN" or Data::Dumper or mySQL or "check your permissions"
or NO Fmh THAT'S WRONG or "You can't. crypt is one-way" or "yes, i'm single"
or "I think that's a faq." or substr! or "use split" or "man perlre" - #perl

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists (04--11 Feb 2001)

[Ask Bjoern Hansen]

On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:

[...] 
> To you, and to everyone else who has asked, yes. I'm working on setting
> up a list right now, hosted at netthink. It's currently subscribable, but
> there are some teething problems with posting. (Which needn't concern you,
> except that if you subscribe right now, you'll see a flurry of test posts for
> a while.)
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the magic address; at some
> point in the near future, I might move the perl5-porters digest there as
> well.

-digest has a specific meaning with many mailing list managers. I
would suggest calling it perl6-summaries or such to avoid confusion.



 - ask

-- 
ask bjoern hansen - 
more than 70M impressions per day, 

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists (04--11 Feb 2001)

[Simon Cozens]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 04:46:08PM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> Would it be possible to make this summary subsribable, so I can drop my
> subscribtions to p6-internal?

To you, and to everyone else who has asked, yes. I'm working on setting
up a list right now, hosted at netthink. It's currently subscribable, but
there are some teething problems with posting. (Which needn't concern you,
except that if you subscribe right now, you'll see a flurry of test posts for
a while.)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the magic address; at some
point in the near future, I might move the perl5-porters digest there as
well.

-- 
There is no distinction between any AI program and some existent game.

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists (04--11 Feb 2001)

[H . Merijn Brand]

On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:44:38 +, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was being serious. But first, a plea:
> 
> This is much harder than doing the Perl 5 summaries, because I have to
> watch over a lot more things. I'd appreciate some help; if you feel this
> is a useful exercise and you can spare about an hour a week, please get
> in touch with me and I'll tell you how you can help me. Alternatively, I
> seem to recall that there was some idea that the working group chairs
> would produce their own summaries of what we're doing. Is this still
> meant to happen, or was that just for the RFC phase?
> 
> Ask, Dave, you may host this where you want; I retain copyright, and grant
> you a non-exclusive right to publish. The HTML edition will be placed
> at 
> http://www.simon-cozens.org/perl6/THISWEEK-MMDD.html
>  
> That is, this week's will be at
> http://www.simon-cozens.org/perl6/THISWEEK-20010211.html
> 
> Please let me know what you're going to do with it, so I can point news sites
> at your version.
> 
> Anyway, on with the show.

Would it be possible to make this summary subsribable, so I can drop my
subscribtions to p6-internal?

-- 
H.Merijn Brand   Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://www.amsterdam.pm.org/)
using perl-5.005.03, 5.6.0, 5.6.1, 5.7.1 & 623 on HP-UX 10.20 & 11.00, AIX 4.2
   AIX 4.3, WinNT 4.0 SP-6a, and Win2000pro often with Tk800.022 &/| DBD-Unify
ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/languages/perl/CPAN/authors/id/H/HM/HMBRAND/

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Ask Bjoern Hansen]

On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:

[...]
> If you think it would be ethical and correct for the assistants to draw
> a salary while the editor does not, please go ahead and push O'Reilly
> for money. 

I want a cent per mail delivered from the perl mailinglists![1] Who
want's to pay?

(In other words: I agree entirely).


 - ask   

[1] that would currently be +$1750 a day if I'm reading my logs
correctly. wow. that's a whole lot of Perl mail! :-)

-- 
ask bjoern hansen - 
more than 70M impressions per day, 

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Simon Cozens]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2001 at 07:32:46PM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> David L. Nicol writes:
> > Is there a budget?  Apprenticeship makes all kinds of sense when
> > there is actually a money flow into the guild; the carrot of eventual
> > credentials is too weak for me and many lesser poetasters.  
> > 
> > Could O'Reilly and Microsoft divert some funds to actually paying people
> > for helping out?  That would change the ball game something massive
> 
> I can't speak the final word for O'Reilly, but I can say that we're
> already paying Larry's salary and have basically told him that
> his most important job is Perl6. 

I am editing and producing the perl6 summaries as a pro bono publici,
because I believe that more information about Perl 6 will help the wider
community; nobody is making any money out of the work I am producing. 

If you think it would be ethical and correct for the assistants to draw
a salary while the editor does not, please go ahead and push O'Reilly
for money. 

For my part, I would not recommend such a course of action.

-- 
If they can put a man on the moon, why can't they put them all there?

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Nathan Torkington]

David L. Nicol writes:
> Is there a budget?  Apprenticeship makes all kinds of sense when
> there is actually a money flow into the guild; the carrot of eventual
> credentials is too weak for me and many lesser poetasters.  
> 
> Could O'Reilly and Microsoft divert some funds to actually paying people
> for helping out?  That would change the ball game something massive

I can't speak the final word for O'Reilly, but I can say that we're
already paying Larry's salary and have basically told him that
his most important job is Perl6.  Until that shows fruit, we'd be
very unlikely to tip more money in the way of perl6.

Good luck getting blood from a ston^W^W^W^W money from Microsoft :-)

Nat

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[David L. Nicol]

"Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> 
> [1] See the massive thread starting at
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00584.html


Is there a budget?  Apprenticeship makes all kinds of sense when
there is actually a money flow into the guild; the carrot of eventual
credentials is too weak for me and many lesser poetasters.  

Could O'Reilly and Microsoft divert some funds to actually paying people
for helping out?  That would change the ball game something massive



-- 
  David Nicol 816.235.1187 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Simon Cozens]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 11:26:54AM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> It also sounds like a good task for the PAWBs[1] - perhaps as contributors 
> while you handle the editing?

Very good thinking! I've already had a couple of volunteers (Thanks guys!)
so to save me sending out the same mail over and over again, here's what I
need. Every week, probably on Friday or Saturday, I'll send out a list of
threads that I'd like people to look over, summarise and extract useful
quotes from. If people could do that and get them back to me by the
Sunday evening, I can release a new issue every Sunday.

> BTW, lead from the front, so I'll volunteer.

Much appreciated! Thanks.

-- 
I wish my keyboard had a SMITE key
-- J-P Stacey

Re: This week on the perl6 mailing lists

[Bryan C. Warnock]

Simon:
> This is much harder than doing the Perl 5 summaries, because I have to
> watch over a lot more things. I'd appreciate some help; if you feel this
> is a useful exercise and you can spare about an hour a week, please get
> in touch with me and I'll tell you how you can help me. Alternatively, I
> seem to recall that there was some idea that the working group chairs
> would produce their own summaries of what we're doing. Is this still
> meant to happen, or was that just for the RFC phase?

It also sounds like a good task for the PAWBs[1] - perhaps as contributors 
while you handle the editing?

[1] See the massive thread starting at 
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00584.html

BTW, lead from the front, so I'll volunteer.
 
-- 
Bryan C. Warnock
[EMAIL PROTECTED]