I looked at the site when this announcement was posted. Noted that it's owned by The Perl Foundation, which is the promoter of "Perl6", and that the redesigned site made mention of planning content about both languages. Decided to hold my peace at the time, but concluded that it would prove to be mostly a TPF/P6 coup.
Didn't take long.
See this article there, in which one of the TPF committee members proposes a couple of new strategies for how "P6" can better suck the life out of Perl, errrr, sorry, "how the Perl 5 to P6 'migration' can be accelerated" ... and the Reddit discussion that followed, with comments from many of today's most active CPAN authors.
The way forward always starts with a minimal test.
The Perl Foundation is dedicated to the advancement of the Perl programming language through open discussion, collaboration, design, and code. It coordinates the efforts of numerous grass-roots Perl-based groups, including: International Yet Another Perl Conferences; Carries the legal responsibility for Perl 5 and Perl 6; perl.org; Perl Mongers; PerlMonks.
Saying that TPF is the promoter of "Perl6" appears to be untrue, in that it e.g. also is responsible for PerlMonks, which I could hardly describe as "promoting Perl6"
That is incredibly disingenuous, Liz. As you know better than most other people, The Perl Foundation spends money to sponsor technical conferences under the "Perl6" name, using the butterfly logo as the sponsor logo, and has tables at them with "P6" banners and other paraphernalia.
It's notable that the TPF blurb you cited makes no mention of the fact that Perl 5 and "P6" are separate languages, "sisters in the same family", etc., even though this is the apparently official position as published on perl.org. But it's not surprising, given that your own thoughts on the matter are public record (2018-01-17):
19:41 lizmat: I would like to go on record that I have never bought in
+to the sister language argument
19:42 I think it was a necessary evil at the time
19:42 and I think it is time to get rid of that necessary evil
Necessary evil for what, Liz? For maintaining the pretense that "P6" was not in fact intended to displace Perl? If you mean something else, please clarify.
As for your other absurd assertion: to say that because TPF is the legal umbrella for PerlMonks, and because PM does not (in your assertion) promote "P6", therefore TPF cannot be promoting "P6", is not only a complete syllogism, it flies in the face of the fact that PerlMonks (against the wishes of some of its members) does carry "P6" promotional announcements, often front-paging them.
The way forward always starts with a minimal test.
I didn't agree with substantial parts of Liz's blog posting, though she is of course perfectly entitled to her own opinions, and it might interest you to learn that neither did the main developer of Perl 6, Jonathan Worthington.
I've always been quite happy with the evolved narrative of sisterhood vis Perl 5 and 6. I do a significant amount of Perl 5 work yet I find Perl 6 very interesting and I hope it continues to catch on. There are many signs that this is happening. As far as I can see, this is all good. It's not a zero sum game. The success of Perl 5 does not diminish Perl 6 and vice versa.
As a Perl programmer and devout advocate since 1993, I gotta add my opinion here:
15 years ago the idea Perl 6 might of been a great idea, but IMO these days fundamentally changing the language structure isnt the way to go.
Doing things like changing how you reference an array element from '$' to '@' only serves to alienate the dwindling base of Perl programmers that still exist. And quite frankly stuff like 'the sigil matches the type of end variable you are working with' is what *makes* Perl Perl!! :)
IMO TO FIX: Ditch Perl 6, take the best features that dont alter Perl 5 syntax, and incorporate them into Perl 7.
Case in point: The English language has alot of illogic and inconsistency, but noone in their right mind would start a campaign to try and 'fix it'.
Not trying to start a flame war. I sincerely care about the future of the language and think that embracing the Perl 5 syntax is the way to go here.
I actually agree with you about sigils matching the type of the variable. Many folks have expressed confusion and dismay over it throughout the life of Perl but to me it was always absolutely logical and sensible as grammar. That said, you and I are in the minority and people have actually attempted to fix or simplify English over the years, including Ben Franklin's ludicrous spelling reform attempt. Perl 5 isn't going away soon and if it can continue to attract talented core devs it might never. The Perl 6 ship has sailed and fighting against it or trying to call it back to port hurts Perl 5, as already mentioned in this thread.
If you care about Perl 5, put your efforts and energies there. The lack of apps has more to do with its usage spiral than any competition ever did. A single person, like Sri, MST, or Miyagawa, can stem the tide with a single good idea. Working will always beat complaining.
Update: cleaned up a couple words/commas that were bugging me.