On 15 Mar 2008, at 02:55, John Gruber wrote:
On Feb 28, 2008, at 12:34 PM, Tomas Doran wrote:
I'm actively maintaining the CPAN modules Text::Markdown, and
Text::MultiMarkdown, and longer term, I'd like these to become the
canonical distribution.
I despise what you've done with Text::Markdown, which is to more or
less make it an alias for MultiMarkdown, almost every part of which
I disagree with in terms of syntax additions.
Wow, that's pretty strong language. I'm glad I'm provoking strong
opinions, and it's nice to see you actively contributing to
Markdown's direction ;)
Personally, I don't actually like (or use) the MultiMarkdown
extensions. As noted several times on list (http://six.pairlist.net/
pipermail/markdown-discuss/2008-March/001100.html and others), I *do
not* consider what I've done to in any way be a good solution
technically / internally in it's current form, and as such
Markdown.pl is still a better 'reference' implementation.
However I find it somewhat ironic that you can criticise an active
effort to actually move Markdown forwards (who's current flaws have
been publicly acknowledged), when it passes more of your test suite
than your effort does, and when you haven't even been bothered to
update your own website about the project since 2004, despite having
updated the code which can be found on your site (if you dig) much
more recently than this.
Don't get me wrong - the internals of the code I'm publishing are
*shockingly nasty*, and I *am currently* refactoring so that
Text::Markdown is a standalone implementation (with just the original
Markdown feature set), that Text::MultiMarkdown builds upon. I will
also shortly be providing a Markdown.pl that works for command line
usage and also does the MT and bloxom plugin magic.
At that point my implementation will be less buggy (by your test
suite), faster and more compatible with recent perl versions than any
version of the 'original' Markdown.pl. I also plan to (eventually)
produce a Text::MarkdownExtra which adds those extensions, but I plan
to do it from the same codebase, in some way that is less grotty than
having a load (more) 'turn feature X off' switches.
The code I have at the moment, is, however a step along the road, and
was the most pragmatic thing to do in the short term to un-fuck and
update both modules.
I despise copy-pasted code, and forks for no (real) reason - seeing
*another two* dead copies of the same code on CPAN made me sad, and
so I've done *something* to take the situation forwards. Maybe if
you'd put the effort into maintaining a community and taking
Markdown.pl forwards at any time within the last 4 years, you
wouldn't be in a situation where people have taken 'your baby' and
perverted it to a point that you despise. If starting with
Markdown.pl and going forwards with that *had been an option*, then
that would have been my preferred route - but I didn't see any value
in producing what would have been a **fifth** perl Markdown
implementation.
Cheers
Tom
(http://svn.kulp.ch/cpan/text_multimarkdown/branches/
splitcode_unshell_Text-Markdown/lib/Text/Markdown.pm is where I am
now, more stuff needs fixing / pulling apart to be able to do
Text::MultiMarkdown without so much c&p code)
_______________________________________________
Markdown-Discuss mailing list
Markdown-Discuss@six.pairlist.net
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
