good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
Re^8: Hockey Sticksby raiph (Hermit)
|on Jul 11, 2012 at 04:10 UTC||Need Help??|
What the Parrot, Rakudo and niecza teams ship is what wikipedia defines as a "software release".
The Rakudo compiler release process is indeed much less formal than Perl 5's, but there is much more to it than you suggest. Patrick is currently rewriting the release management document; visit #perl6 if you're interested in more details.
> I see some problems in marketing and talking about Perl 6.
Oh boy, me too! Forget marketing. Just talking about P6 where it is ostensibly supposed to be discussed, eg in this meditation, or announcing releases using the Perl reddit tag, routinely attracts trolls.
> Firstly you need to come up with something solid and then announce, or you shouldn't announce at all.
Which announcements are you talking about? The monthly releases (or whatever you wish to call them)? Would you call this meditation an announcement?
> the words 'Production release' , '1.0.0', 'ready', 'done' have semantics beyond their dictionary meanings in the software world.
Right. I'm unaware of anyone applying those words to Perl 6 as it currently stands. Perhaps the closest is that Larry has recently begun to talk about productizing Perl 6 over the "next year or two".
> For most Perl 5 developers, 'Production ready', 'complete', 'done' or any other equivalent word means software at least as much ready and usable as Perl 5 is. Therefore if you ever want Perl 6 to be 'complete', its likely to never be- considering the scope and breadth of the work.
I agree. It would be a mistake to only ship P6 when it's "complete" in that extreme sense.
> I seriously doubt if the current path will lead to anything usable in coming years either.
Several users have P6 solutions currently in use in production settings; how could they if it's not usable?