in reply to Re^4: Four Legs Good, Five Legs Bad
in thread Perl 6: Managing breakages across Rakudo Star versions

There are already Rakudo users and some are using it in production settings

The AM had said, and I had then quoted, "if this is not supposed to be a production release then why even bother" {managing breakages across Rakudo versions}. Would you label or characterize a recent release as a "production release"? I wouldn't. More to the point, the team hasn't.

In an attempt to help the AM see why I support Patrick's position about caring even though it isn't a "production release", I suggested they think about it from Patrick's point of view. One of several factors that cumulatively all but compel him to care about breakages is that he has actual users (and indeed this could imo be sufficient reason regardless of whether or not anyone would characterize their setup as a production setting).

the "untrue negative stuff" you mention seems to be "I think you are referring to IRC bots and Rosetta code wiki submitters, which in case their use cases hardly count for production settings. Rakudo doesn't have serious users."

Ah. No. That connection never occurred to me. The AM had asserted "I think xxx", with which assertion I have little quibble, and that Larry's valiant effort at RC, and bot code, don't count as use in a production setting, with which I have no quibble at all. The assertions to which I was referring were the ones I quoted.

Several users have P6 solutions currently in use in production settings; how could they if it's not usable?

Indeed. This was another AM: "I seriously doubt if the current path will lead to anything usable in coming years either." I've encountered folk who have heard of Perl 6 and thought work on it had stopped. While I'm willing to entertain debate on just how usable and useful Rakudo Star is, if I see what sounds to me like negative hyperbole that feeds the basic misconception that it is vaporware, I am inclined to contest it, especially here on PerlMonks.

I think and hope we're much more in agreement about the many issues around Perl 5 and 6 than appearances suggest. I believe you like Perl 6, but seek to ensure that it is minimally distracting for Perl 5 activity until it is sufficiently mature to warrant renewed consideration. I want the same thing. I think it warrants renewed attention right now, so I'm posting tidbits I think might be helpful and intend to continue doing so. I dream of a day when Perl 5 and 6 are both seen by the broader tech community as very positive elements of an expanding Perl universe. I hope and trust you do too.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Four Legs Good, Five Legs Bad
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Jul 20, 2012 at 16:23 UTC
    I believe you like Perl 6, but seek to ensure that it is minimally distracting for Perl 5 activity until it is sufficiently mature to warrant renewed consideration.

    Perhaps you and I would get along better if you'd stop inventing conspiracies. Telling other people what they think (especially when you're wrong) seems like an ineffective marketing strategy.

      I'm not inventing conspiracies. I didn't intend to tell you or anyone else what they think, nor do I think I did so. For example, "I believe you ..." asserts what I'm believing, not you. While I of course believe what I believe, I'm not claiming to be omniscient.

      Your comment suggests to me that something in the belief I expressed is wrong. I'm pretty confident you still like Perl 6, that you feel you were let down by the Rakudo team, and that you want to see them do better. Hopefully that's accurate, but please remember that it's just my belief, and confidence is not an assertion of truth.