Hello, > From: Michael Mathews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] > On 08/06/06, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Maybe this would be a good time to (semi-)formalize some form of > > recommendations for the project? > > Agreed. (We're talking about the minimal requirements to get the > thousand for a pswiki, right?) Will this work like the Perl 6 > RFC-Roundup, where the community made proposals and then Larry > sorted > them out? Or who shall be the judge?
Good question. :-) I was originally hoping it would be The Perl Foundation, based on a spec developed by @Larry. FYI, here's the original post: "$1,000 prize for Perl 6 Wiki written in Perl 6", (http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.users/127). However, there turned out to be problems with doing a prize through The Perl Foundation. My more recent proposal then became: "$1,000 Grant (was: prize) for Perl 6 Wiki written in Perl 6", (http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.users/217). I didn't get any response to that at all. So my current plan is to offer a prize directly myself, but I'm uncomfortable being the one who decides (1) what the (detailed) spec should be, and (2) who (person, group) has satisfied it, and should be declared the winner. The last link above gives my general requirements. I'd like something that could be done sooner rather than later. Using available Perl 5 modules to get started is fine, as long as Perl 6 code plays some sort of significant role. I'm looking for an initial "XP style" (start with the minimum that will work) implementation that's "good enough for initial practical use", but which leaves the door open to a subsequent series of major improvements. The aim is not to start with a Perl 6 showcase, but to get the ball rolling on a "usable prototype" that can *later* be incrementally transformed into a Perl 6 showcase. (Again, please see the ".../217" link/post above for some elaboration.) I haven't had a chance to adequately digest and think over the preceding wiki posts from last week, but I think tables should be a requirement. As a point of departure, I'm mostly favorably inclined to Juerd's remarks on #perl6 (near the end of the log): (http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/perl6?date=2006-06-04,Sun). However, I think the detailed specs are less important than getting a usable first version of a wiki (that makes some significant use of Perl 6) up and running on feather. If someone can produce a wiki that others are willing to use (and, of course, that doesn't preclude migration to nicer interfaces), that's the most important thing for me. So, back to answering the original question. (1) Is there is someone else on this mailing list that most other posters would generally support as the designated "spec pumking" or "proxy @Larry"? (The guiding criteria are to be the sorts of considerations I've outlined above.) Once the preliminary spec converged on something that attained a moderate degree of consensus in this group, I'd declare it to be the target spec. (2) Would Juerd be willing to serve as the judge of who sufficiently fulfilled the specs? Hopefully others would rally behind whoever steps forward to go for the prize, which could be {demonstrated, facilitated} by making incremental code drops in the pugs svn tree, under ".../examples/.../p6wiki/". Best regards, Conrad Schneiker http://perl.net.au/wiki/Perl_6_Users_FAQ (Moved from AthenaLab to Perl 6 Wiki.) www.AthenaLab.com (Nano-electron-beam and micro-neutron-beam technology.)
