Re^4: Fix the Perl News header

[Your Mother]

in reply to Re^3: Fix the Perl News header
in thread Fix the Perl News header

By this logic the Perl News section on Perl Monks is itself invalid.

[jdporter]

I'd like to see some discussion on the value of Perlbuzz. I don't care whether it's hand-curated, or what. Does it have any value as a "Perl news" source? If so, I'll add it back in.

[erix]

1+

/me looks up perlbuzz regularly. It's useful.

[Argel]

I just took a quick look and I do not see what the problem is. Is there some political agenda being pushed by him, or some feathers he rustled, or....? Update: Duh! I see petdance is Andy! So a fellow Monk is putting a good list of new articles of interest together and we have a problem with including a link to that site?? Problem seems to be NOT including it.

[petdance]

Perlbuzz the blog has become mostly an aggregation of @perlbuzz the Twitter feed, but I run actual articles there every so often as well.

The Twitter feed had 1,745 followers, and perlbuzz.com has 4,567 subscribers of the RSS feed via FeedBurner.

Whether it's a good news source or not is of course subjective, it certainly seems that many people use it.

[educated_foo]

How many personal blogs should count as Perl "news"? That's what PerlBuzz is, and Mr. Lester isn't even a significant Perl contributor (unless you count adding the "const" keyword). I would say "none," because there are too many to include them all.

[Happy-the-monk]

So the blog - the news - is the significant contribution to Perl.

There's Perl, the language... perl & CPAN, the implementation... and there is also the Perl Community and Perl Monks is far from being all of it.

Also, there apparently are some people who seem to be good at everything and it looks as if they do well everywhere and have got time for all kinds of things. But more often then not, people will do one thing very well, or just a few things, and devote their time for that purpose. That is of real value, too.

Cheers, Sören

[petdance]

Do you have a standard in mind?

What, in your estimation, does someone have to do in order to be deemed "a significant Perl contributor"?

[educated_foo]

As I said in the previous post, "no personal blogs." There are too many Perl core contributors with blogs for the average Perl user to read all of them, and there's no single "pumpking blog," so the best policy is for no personal blog to get special mention. A few automated, widely-used RSS aggregators are the best starting-point for Perl news.

As for what (IMHO) someone has to do be a "significant" Perl contributor... Adding a substantial user-visible feature and spending substantial thought and time on the day-to-day business of Perl maintenance count. Cosmetic, mindless source code changes (e.g. replacing tabs with spaces) don't.

EDIT: Cute:

Reputation: -2 (+0 -2)

So petdance and one other person won't tolerate even mild, tangential criticism of petdance.

[pemungkah]

Andy's too nice to mention it, but WWW::Mechanize for heaven's sake. If that's not a contribution then I've definitely never contributed anything.

[educated_foo]

He did some good CPAN work in the past. AFAICT, he's not the original author, or even the current maintainer, but the maintainer between 2005 and 2010.