On Monday 28 April 2008 18:03:23 Shlomi Fish wrote: > > > > http://www.shlomifish.org/perl-timeline-temp/PerlTimeline.html > > > > Excellent work. > > Thanks. > Well, I started to revise it myself once, but didn't get much of an answer from anywhere about how to take it on either. I wasn't offered my own new wiki-thread though, maybe I didn't ask the right person...
> No, it's not about perl6 vs. perl5. It's about the original Timeline by > Elaine vs. a new timeline (for Perl, probably both 5 and 6 > As you might realise, I'm reading between the lines a bit, and it's perhaps not perl5/perl6, (that was a bit of a wide swipe), but it's the same people and cliques we're talking about. > > I mean, Elaine sounds a bit pissed off, but I'm not really surprised when > > she gets her project whipped from under her feet. > > That was not my intention, but may have seem like it. > I realise that you had not intended to make this much of an issue out it, or to trample on another (if aged) project. As I see it, it's happened that way, because of choices people-in-power have made as to how to react to someone who disagrees with them. And particularly to those people who are outside of the current magic-circle. > > I don't see why we have to trash the old stuff, just because certain > > people have positions of power and can (ab-)use it to side-step the issue. > > We're not going to remove the old timeline. Also, I'd like to continue > updating it, and hopefully Elaine will accept my modifications. > Sure, I can see what you mean, and that sounds very altruistic, to keep Elaine's material 'on file' so to speak. It's a highly defensible position, on the face of it, but in reality, we all know what being quietly side-lined means. -- Richard Foley Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen http://www.rfi.net/
