On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Struan Donald wrote: > * at 23/01 17:44 +0000 Mark Fowler said: > > > > This name has to go. Perl 6 makes it sound like it's just another update > > to perl. It's not. It's a new beginning. > > won't that just confuse people? alternately it's the sort of thing > people see through pretty easliy too. i > > "foo? what's that? oh, i see, it's just perl with a different name" > > you have to convince them that perl 6 is a good thing because it is a > good thing rather than with a flashy name. plus i think there is > possibly enough good feeling etc out there that it's worth hanging on > to the name. >
Before people get despondent, I met someone in a club in Oxford who told me perl was good though bad, and asked me if perl 6 would make it better. Given that otherwise unconnected people are hearing about what's happening, faffing with a name would spoil the effect entirely. Alex Gough
