This was the place where a single volunteer said they no longer wanted to maintain rt.cpan.org, no discussion was offered to allow someone else the opportunity to pick this up. Mails from people not in this group were ignored, as was the pleas from members (some responsible for toolchain and other core perl stuff) that this would cause chaos. This was something not widely publicised, coming as a surprise to many, others I suspect just never found out. Not until this gained a wider audience elsewhere (p5p, even though it could be considered 'off topic' for that list) was something done, almost at the last minute, to stop rt.cpan from closing. See also http://blogs.perl.org/users/martin_mcgrath/2021/01/regarding-the-closure-of-rtcpan.html
| [reply] |
Ah, so you're talking about the infrastructure list. Well, TPF isn't exactly known for transparency and being in touch with the community. The fact that the list has public archives is already a huge improvement compared to a few years ago, when *everything* was happening behind the closed doors.
| [reply] |
Thank you for this reply, yes this is I believe part of the confusion. A lot of things seem to happen behind closed doors, or at least a decision is made while ignoring many of the people who are expected to do the work, or otherwise be impacted by the consequences of a decision, in some recent high profile cases this has been a decision that an individual has made. Please note that I've made no attack against any of the individuals involved, I full appreciate their best intentions and do no agree with abuse or bullying.
| [reply] |
> Perl development is still meant to be discussed on p5p and github
Yeah, but p5p is a mailing-list, where discussions are decided by endurance and individuals with commit bits.
The decision process is so efficient that it took less than 20 years to produce "experimental" signatures.
| [reply] |
