Re: What's a PDD for the rest of us?
At 03:08 PM 12/6/00 -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: >On Wed, 06 Dec 2000, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > Well, until Larry releases the spec, just about everything else is frozen, > > though we can certainly expand the PDD stuff to include the standard > > library, documentation, and QA stuff. (It seems a tad premature to be > > proposing language changes when we neither have a final language spec nor > > an implementation of that spec...) PDDs don't have to be all internal--I > > changed the name to deal with the confusion with the IETF's RFCs. (We were > > fast creeping up on the active RFC range) > >Understood. One other quick question. Are the PDDs expect to go terminal at >the delivery of Perl 6, or should the active PDDs continue to evolve and >govern Perl 6 maintenance as well? (If that makes any sense.) I want them to continue, though whether they do depends on who has the magic sucker hat once things go final. It's my intent that anyone who wants to get complete documentation for X (where X could be the parser API, or the vtable API, or the guaranteed behaviour of the GC, or the PerlIO API and required behaviour) can grab the PDD covering it and be set. Something, more or less, like the IETF standards RFCs, only with revisions of each PDD rather than a half zillion "supercedes or upgrades" RFCs. Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
Re: What's a PDD for the rest of us?
On Wed, 06 Dec 2000, Dan Sugalski wrote: > Well, until Larry releases the spec, just about everything else is frozen, > though we can certainly expand the PDD stuff to include the standard > library, documentation, and QA stuff. (It seems a tad premature to be > proposing language changes when we neither have a final language spec nor > an implementation of that spec...) PDDs don't have to be all internal--I > changed the name to deal with the confusion with the IETF's RFCs. (We were > fast creeping up on the active RFC range) Understood. One other quick question. Are the PDDs expect to go terminal at the delivery of Perl 6, or should the active PDDs continue to evolve and govern Perl 6 maintenance as well? (If that makes any sense.) -- Bryan C. Warnock RABA Technologies
Re: What's a PDD for the rest of us?
At 02:39 PM 12/6/00 -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote: >In http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/msg01766.html, >Dan outlined rev 2 of the RFC process, PDD (Perl Design Docs). > >Everything seems rather specific to internals - will there be a separate >mechanism in place for all-things non-internal, say, for instance, the format >for a non-internal mechanism mirroring the PDD? Well, until Larry releases the spec, just about everything else is frozen, though we can certainly expand the PDD stuff to include the standard library, documentation, and QA stuff. (It seems a tad premature to be proposing language changes when we neither have a final language spec nor an implementation of that spec...) PDDs don't have to be all internal--I changed the name to deal with the confusion with the IETF's RFCs. (We were fast creeping up on the active RFC range) Dan --"it's like this"--- Dan Sugalski even samurai [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even teddy bears get drunk
