On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 01:49:45PM -0700, Stephen Zander wrote:
> Perl's great blessing is also it's great curse; there's a single
> implementation and that *implementation* happens to be OpenSource.
> Try writing a second Perl implementation from scratch.
Fortunately, we don't have to. :)
Perl 6 should have a more fathomable design, or at least better
documented. I don't think it'll ever reach the sort of standards that
things like Java and C++ have. Then again, have you LOOKED at the
ANSI C++ standard? ;)
> Were something dreadful to happen to Larry and his estate chose to
> change the licensing terms of the current *implementation*
In that Highly Unlikely event, we can simply fork off the source code
from the point where the license changed. License changes are not
retroactive. The only restriction is we couldn't call it 'perl' under
the AL.
I don't think such a thing has ever happened to a major Open Source
project, this doesn't worry me. The license squabbling between the
various BSD's is similar, but they're all still Open.
> where would Perl6 go?
Same place its going right now, as there's no code. :)
--
Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One
