Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
Finally slogging through my mail backlog after the holidays, and i find this: On Dec 10, 2008, at 4:41 AM, Andy Wardley wrote: PS I think we should make Perl is Alive! the unoffical secret verbal handshake by which Perl mongers make themselves known to each other (spoken in the style of Brian Blessed in Flash Gordon, of course). The correct response would be something along the lines of Dispatch war rocket AJAX to bring back the document body from a server-side Perl web application handler powered by Catalyst, DBIx::Class, TT, Moose, and many of the other fine modules available from CPAN that make Perl a robust and reliable platform for enterprise-ready solutions. Hmm... might need to make the response a little more snappy... but I think it's got promise :-) ... and now i can sleep at night, knowing what has been elided by the ellipsis in the header on the new website. Thanks, Andy. Can we get a link to an audio clip of you reading that entire exchange in the style of Brian Blessed, please? -- I hate to break it to you, but magic data pixies don't exist. -- Simon Cozens
Re: Perl is Alive!
p.s. maybe we could have an auction item - let's buy back perl.com? This sounds like a good idea. If Tom has a deal with ORA (sorry O'R) then it's his business, if I was him, and I'm not, I'd want to see the value of moving the domain name before even entering into the discussion, and currently perl.com offers good content. And the association with a large company like O'R is only good for Perl's reputation. Well Tom knows the value of the domain name - he's been getting good rent for it for 8 years. But if I was him I would want to rid my hands of it. I think TPF could buy it for a few peppercorns - and a clause that says they won't sue. Also perl.com is hosted at O'R's expense, with their design and development and it looks pretty good. And I personally trust them fully with the job. I don't mind what O'R is doing with perl.com. I personally think Tom should assign the domain name to the TPF and the TPF should license it back to O'R on a yearly basis. The TPF can then put the license fee to good use for the benefit of the community - but what TPF does with perl.com is for them to decide - they are the rightful owners. There is a lot of work to be done to help Perl, not least the core development that I believe is seeing less resource, and arguing about the ownership of a domain name and 2nd guessing what Tom is doing is a waste of our time. Standing up for what's right is never a waste of time. I've spoken to Tom directly about this. I know what I'm talking about. Perl is supposed to be about open source and openness but shine some light on the cracks and you soon get the 'cabal treatment'. It's really sad to see. We're open as long as you don't look too hard. If you really want to help perl.com, perl.org or perlbuzz; write some articles that appeal to the wider world outside the goldfish bowl of the Perl community. Haha. That old jedi mind-trick, 'there's nothing to see here - go and write an article'. Come on! Let's do proper open source - where people show some fairness and respect for other's IP. It will be good for Perl(R) and good for the community. What does the Perl community *really* stand for? Is it about openness and respecting each other's intellectual endeavours? Or is it a front for a self-interested cabal? Perl has got a BIG future - Perl6, Parrot, Artistic 2.0 etc are all brilliant. But sometimes we forget that out of all Perl's intellectual properties the Perl(R) trade mark is the most valuable and enduring. We should all be standing up to protect it where we can[1]. So are we moving forward? or has the Ruby guy got a point? whois perl.com PERL.COM.IS.AN.OLD.WASHED.OUT.LANGUAGE.USE.RUBY-CODE.COM.PERL.COM I hope not. Greg, instead of wasting time replying to me - why don't you do the right thing and email Alison? Let's get this sorted out and put Perl(R) on the best footing for the future. Nige [1] Don't just take my word for it - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl_trademark But our responsibility is also partly the responsibility of the whole Perl community. By helping us protect the Perl trademark, you help us protect the openness and integrity of the Perl language
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nigel Hamilton wrote: but what TPF does with perl.com is for them to decide - they are the rightful owners. I really don't understand this argument at all. If anyone could lay a claim to perl.com, it's Larry himself (and I really don't see him doing that). But I don't understand why you think that TPF has a better claim to it than Tom. Perhaps you're assuming that TPF has a level of officiality (is that the right word?) that it doesn't have and (as far as I know) doesn't aspire to. Both Tom and O'Reilly have been very good for Perl. Without them I don' think that we'd be here having this conversation. If they make some money off the back of it, then I have no objections to that. Dave...
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nigel Hamilton wrote: Well Tom knows the value of the domain name - he's been getting good rent for it for 8 years. Could you tell the list how much you think this good rent is? (Disclaimer: I was the managing editor of perl.com for a large proportion of those 8 years.) -- Hubris is when you really do have it, enough so only the gods slap you down. Pretentiousness is when you don't have it, and everyone slaps you down. Arrogance is somewhere in between. - Thorfinn
Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
Nigel Hamilton wrote: TPF have never owned the domain perl.com - but they have always had a right to own it. The TPF and the community have a right to get the goodwill back. Tom has never been the owner of the goodwill and trademarks associated with Perl. Tom Christiansen was one of the figureheads of the Perl community long before TPF existed. In particular, he was responsible for much of the core documentation and, of course, the camel book. In my mind, that makes him very much an owner of the goodwill associated with Perl, if not the legal trademark. I believe (but don't have any facts to hand) that he was hosting perl.com before Perl was trademarked. My earliest recollection of Perl being trademarked was around '97 or '98 when ORA started doing Perl conferences and I'm sure perl.com was around before that. I also find it very hard to believe that he would have registered and run perl.com without Larry's consent. So the fact that Larry (presumably) consented to him owning perl.com could be construed by a court of law as a failure on Larry's part to adequately protect his trademark. By not telling Tom to stop with perl.com he may have given up his right to claim that perl.com was an integral part of the Perl[tm] trademark. IANAL but I think that trying to paint Tom as a cyber-squatter would be morally questionable if not legally shaky. return perl.com to its rightful owner. I agree that it would be in Perl's best interests if TPF controlled perl.com but I'm not convinced that they have a right to demand it. A PS I think we should make Perl is Alive! the unoffical secret verbal handshake by which Perl mongers make themselves known to each other (spoken in the style of Brian Blessed in Flash Gordon, of course). The correct response would be something along the lines of Dispatch war rocket AJAX to bring back the document body from a server-side Perl web application handler powered by Catalyst, DBIx::Class, TT, Moose, and many of the other fine modules available from CPAN that make Perl a robust and reliable platform for enterprise-ready solutions. Hmm... might need to make the response a little more snappy... but I think it's got promise :-)
Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
2008/12/10 Andy Wardley [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I agree that it would be in Perl's best interests if TPF controlled perl.com but I'm not convinced that they have a right to demand it. I think even this point might be open to debate.
Re: Perl is Alive!
2008/12/10 Dave Cross [EMAIL PROTECTED] but what TPF does with perl.com is for them to decide - they are the rightful owners. I really don't understand this argument at all. If anyone could lay a claim to perl.com, it's Larry himself (and I really don't see him doing that). But I don't understand why you think that TPF has a better claim to it than Tom. Perhaps you're assuming that TPF has a level of officiality (is that the right word?) I'm not assuming anything. The Perl Foundation own the trade mark to Perl and all the goodwill that goes with it. They are the official holder of Perl's intellectual property - including the Perl brand - it's most valuable asset[1]. that it doesn't have and (as far as I know) doesn't aspire to. It does own the brand and we should all be aspiring to protect it for the good of the community[1]. Both Tom and O'Reilly have been very good for Perl. No doubt. I'm not debating that. But the fact is perl.com has been *very* good for Tom. I'm talking about a significant amount of money that could have gone on TPF grants. Without them I don' think that we'd be here having this conversation. We might also be talking about Perl6 being released *this* Christmas. I'm not against the arrangement with O'Reilly - this can remain the same - it's just the licence fee needs to paid to the rightful owner - that's fair. Nige [1] The work of The Perl Foundation includes making sure that Perl code and documentation are free and open for all to use, and remain free and open for all to use. One of the many ways we do this is through the Perl trademark.
Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
2008/12/10 Jonathan Stowe [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2008/12/10 Andy Wardley [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I agree that it would be in Perl's best interests if TPF controlled perl.com but I'm not convinced that they have a right to demand it. I think even this point might be open to debate. How about we don't? /joel
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nigel Hamilton wrote: I'm not against the arrangement with O'Reilly - this can remain the same - it's just the licence fee needs to paid to the rightful owner - that's fair. Constantly repeating that TPF is the rightful owner of the domain doesn't make it true. Dave...
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nigel Hamilton wrote: Well if you were the managing editor why don't you tell us? ;-) For a very simple reason: I want you to admit that you have no idea. -- You're not Dave. Who are you?
Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
TPF have never owned the domain perl.com - but they have always had a right to own it. The TPF and the community have a right to get the goodwill back. Tom has never been the owner of the goodwill and trademarks associated with Perl. Tom Christiansen was one of the figureheads of the Perl community long before TPF existed. In particular, he was responsible for much of the core documentation and, of course, the camel book. Fantastic. You've made lots of contributions too. Lots of people have made contributions freely and generously. Not to mention Larry's contribution! The goodwill in Perl should be the community's asset. In my mind, that makes him very much an owner of the goodwill associated with Perl, if not the legal trademark. Well I'm glad that this is only the situation in your mind. Because in the real world The Perl Foundation owns the trademark and they hold it for the benefit of the community - Tom does not own the goodwill in Perl. Nige
Re: Perl is Alive!
2008/12/10 Simon Cozens [EMAIL PROTECTED] Nigel Hamilton wrote: Well Tom knows the value of the domain name - he's been getting good rent for it for 8 years. Could you tell the list how much you think this good rent is? (Disclaimer: I was the managing editor of perl.com for a large proportion of those 8 years.) Well if you were the managing editor why don't you tell us? ;-) Nige
Re: Perl is Alive! (Dispatch war rocket AJAX...)
2008/12/10 Nigel Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Well I'm glad that this is only the situation in your mind. Because in the real world The Perl Foundation owns the trademark and they hold it for the benefit of the community - Tom does not own the goodwill in Perl. The law isn't physically real either - it's just a bunch rules that may or may not be applied depending on a wide variety of things including but not limited to the moods of parties involved, previous actions of all involved, and importantly at least 2 useful parties giving half a jot.. which I'm afraid we're still 2 short of. A. -- http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk LAMP System Integration, Development and Hosting
Re: Perl is Alive!
On 10 Dec 2008, at 10:01, Nigel Hamilton wrote: But the fact is perl.com has been *very* good for Tom. Careful. That's starting to sound like sour grapes. -- Mike Whitaker - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Perl is Alive!
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 08:29:57AM +, Nigel Hamilton wrote: Well Tom knows the value of the domain name - he's been getting good rent for it for 8 years. But if I was him I would want to rid my hands of it. I think TPF could buy it for a few peppercorns - and a clause that says they won't sue. That would be a fantastic way for TPF to commit suicide. While they might win a stupid court thing, they'd lose a great deal of their support in the community. Perl is supposed to be about open source and openness but shine some light on the cracks and you soon get the 'cabal treatment'. It's really sad to see. We're open as long as you don't look too hard. We're open. Just don't expect other people to do stuff for you unless they want to do it anyway. Feel free to try to persuade them, but don't think that people are obliged to pay any attention to you. Come on! Let's do proper open source - where people show some fairness and respect for other's IP. It will be good for Perl(R) and good for the community. OK, let's be fair. Let's start by looking at the trademark. TPF's website says that it's the *logo* that is trademarked, not the word. And even if the word was trademarked, then was it trademarked before or after Tom registered perl.com? If after (and I'm fairly sure it was), don't you think it would be *unfair* and *disrespectful* to sue him? -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice
Re: Perl is Alive!
Andy Wardley wrote: Ovid wrote: Marketing is not inherently evil. Can I put in a plug for branding, too. A plug? [Andrew does a quick google] Ah yes Branding has gone electric these days. http://www.equibrand.co.uk/electricbrands.html Andrew
Re: Perl is Alive!
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Nigel Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * A Larry-approved strapline for Perl - what is it? why should I use it? what itch does it scratch? There is more than one way to do it. I thought it *was* Larry approved... --James
Re: Perl is Alive!
Ruby is not bullshitting anyone, they're not making any unsubstantiated claims as far as I can see. They're being passionate and showing how they're using their language to solve real problems. Sure, we might think that perl can do it better but we're crap at getting other people to see it. Branding is important for idea packaging and transmission. A brand simplifies sending a message and in these agile, ajaxian times where people are suffering from attention poverty Perl needs a way of attractively packaging some of its more hairy messages. I'm really glad to see Perl6's branding strategy in action. It's a great idea to make Perl the umbrella brand as it gives room for sub-brands to grow: rakudo, pugs, elf, (smop - needs one) etc. and it also hedges risk. Just look at the way the Apache and the Mozilla foundation manage branding. There is a clear umbrella mark (the feather, mozilla) but there's room for complimentary sub-brands (lucene, firefox respectively). So I think the Perl foundation is on the right track with Perl(R). Although I think there are two further things that would help: * A Larry-approved strapline for Perl - what is it? why should I use it? what itch does it scratch? * An assignment of perl.com back to the Perl Foundation [1] Nige [1] for the ORA lovers and authors on the list - it could still be licensed back to ORA for use in perl.com but the rightful owner is still the Perl Foundation
Re: Perl is Alive!
Kent Fredric wrote: On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Mike Whitaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marketing, marketing, marketing. Which in my dictionary is: Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!. Then you need to get a better dictionary. There is nothing wrong with marketing per se, good marketing is about telling the truth about your product/service/language in a way that makes it accessible to people. You want them to realise that your solution can help them with whatever pain they have. Your passionate about it and you want them to be passionate too. Bad marketing is lying and yes, there's a lot of it about. Marketing perl should be about telling the world all the great things that can be done with perl and how we do it better than the other possible solutions. Ruby is not bullshitting anyone, they're not making any unsubstantiated claims as far as I can see. They're being passionate and showing how they're using their language to solve real problems. Sure, we might think that perl can do it better but we're crap at getting other people to see it. Simon.
Re: Perl is Alive!
2008/12/9 Nigel Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * An assignment of perl.com back to the Perl Foundation [1] .. [1] for the ORA lovers and authors on the list - it could still be licensed back to ORA for use in perl.com but the rightful owner is still the Perl Foundation Actually perl.com has always been owned by Tom Christiansen, he just lets ORA use it or something
Re: Perl is Alive!
Jonathan Stowe wrote: Actually perl.com has always been owned by Tom Christiansen, he just lets ORA use it or something Bastards: host96:~ simonw$ whois perl.com Whois Server Version 2.0 Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information. PERL.COM.IS.AN.OLD.WASHED.OUT.LANGUAGE.USE.RUBY-CODE.COM PERL.COM To single out one record, look it up with xxx, where xxx is one of the of the records displayed above. If the records are the same, look them up with =xxx to receive a full display for each record. Last update of whois database: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:32:15 EST
Re: Perl is Alive!
Simon Wilcox wrote: Jonathan Stowe wrote: Actually perl.com has always been owned by Tom Christiansen, he just lets ORA use it or something Bastards: host96:~ simonw$ whois perl.com Whois Server Version 2.0 Domain names in the .com and .net domains can now be registered with many different competing registrars. Go to http://www.internic.net for detailed information. PERL.COM.IS.AN.OLD.WASHED.OUT.LANGUAGE.USE.RUBY-CODE.COM PERL.COM An enemy generally says and believes what he wishes. -Thomas Jefferson To single out one record, look it up with xxx, where xxx is one of the of the records displayed above. If the records are the same, look them up with =xxx to receive a full display for each record. Last update of whois database: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 10:32:15 EST
Re: Perl is Alive!
[1] for the ORA lovers and authors on the list - it could still be licensed back to ORA for use in perl.com but the rightful owner is still the Perl Foundation Actually perl.com has always been owned by Tom Christiansen, he just lets ORA use it or something Yes. I've spoken to him about it. He licenses it to ORA who pay him a decent grant-sized amount of money for it per year. My point is the Perl Foundation should be protecting its brand[1] and in the case of perl.com pocketing ORA's domain rental money and spending it on grants for the good of Perl. This money would have gone some way in supporting Perl6 development grants over the past 8 years. I've suggested to Alison that The Perl Foundation should ask Tom nicely if they could have it back. When I spoke to Tom he sounded amenable to the idea of assigning it back[2] ... but there seems to be a sticking point somewhere? Nige p.s. maybe we could have an auction item - let's buy back perl.com? [1] trade mark law requires you to protect your brand [2] he is in a tricky legal position. What about Tom's will? Who would end up with it? Larry? ORA? The Perl Foundation? A relative?
Re: Perl is Alive!
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 04:25:56PM +, Nigel Hamilton wrote: Yes. I've spoken to him about it. He licenses it to ORA who pay him a decent grant-sized amount of money for it per year. My point is the Perl Foundation should be protecting its brand[1] and in the case of perl.com pocketing ORA's domain rental money and spending it on grants for the good of Perl. This money would have gone some way in supporting Perl6 development grants over the past 8 years. I've suggested to Alison that The Perl Foundation should ask Tom nicely if they could have it back. When I spoke to Tom he sounded amenable to the idea of assigning it back[2] ... but there seems to be a sticking point somewhere? What do you mean have it back? Tom was running perl.com as his personal website long before there was even a Perl Foundation. Abigail
Re: Perl is Alive!
I've suggested to Alison that The Perl Foundation should ask Tom nicely if they could have it back. When I spoke to Tom he sounded amenable to the idea of assigning it back[2] ... but there seems to be a sticking point somewhere? What do you mean have it back? Legally assign ownership of it to the Perl Foundation. Tom was running perl.com as his personal website long before there was even a Perl Foundation. Tom has been licensing perl.com to ORA for the last 8 years for personal profit. He's done well out of it - he's also amenable to assigning it to the Perl Foundation - what's the problem? Nige
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nigel Hamilton wrote: I've suggested to Alison that The Perl Foundation should ask Tom nicely if they could have it back. When I spoke to Tom he sounded amenable to the idea of assigning it back[2] ... but there seems to be a sticking point somewhere? What do you mean have it back? Legally assign ownership of it to the Perl Foundation. Tom was running perl.com as his personal website long before there was even a Perl Foundation. Tom has been licensing perl.com to ORA for the last 8 years for personal profit. He's done well out of it - he's also amenable to assigning it to the Perl Foundation - what's the problem? There's no problem at all with the idea of Tom signing the domain over to TPF. That sounds like a good idea to me. The problem is with your use of the word back. Which implies that TPF once previously owned the domain. That's not true. Tom has always owned it. Dave...
Re: Perl is Alive!
There's no problem at all with the idea of Tom signing the domain over to TPF. That sounds like a good idea to me. Great to hear! ;-) The problem is with your use of the word back. Which implies that TPF once previously owned the domain. That's not true. Tom has always owned it. Sorry. I should have been more clear. TPF have never owned the domain perl.com - but they have always had a right to own it. The TPF and the community have a right to get the goodwill back. Tom has never been the owner of the goodwill and trademarks associated with Perl. Larry Wall released Perl publicly before Tom registered perl.com. The goodwill and trade marks in perl were owned by Larry Wall and more recently, by assignment, The Perl Foundation. Tom definitely registered perl.com first but that doesn't mean he is the rightful owner of perl.com. There is now well established case law regarding cyber-squatting[1]. Fortunately I don't think anyone needs to go anywhere near a court with this. As I say, I think Tom is amenable to being asked nicely for it. The TPF website extolls the community to help protect the Perl trade mark [2] - why don't they lead by example and get on the phone? I believe the Perl trademark and domain names will still be here long after we're all gone - but I think now is the time for TPF to show leadership and return perl.com to its rightful owner. Nige [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybersquatting *Cybersquatting* (also known as *domain squatting*), according to the United States federal law known as the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anticybersquatting_Consumer_Protection_Act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faithhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faithintent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else [2] http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl_trademark But our responsibility is also partly the responsibility of the whole Perl community. By helping us protect the Perl trademark, you help us protect the openness and integrity of the Perl language
Re: Perl is Alive!
Nige wrote:- p.s. maybe we could have an auction item - let's buy back perl.com? This sounds like a good idea. Tom has been licensing perl.com to ORA for the last 8 years for personal profit. He's done well out of it - he's also amenable to assigning it to the Perl Foundation - what's the problem? That he would be considerably out of pocket. Maybe a figure could be negotiated with Tom for the domain, and fund raising could be made to get it for TPF? PerlBloke
Re: Perl is Alive!
On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 07:25:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nige wrote:- p.s. maybe we could have an auction item - let's buy back perl.com? This sounds like a good idea. It sounds like a terrible idea. It's not a good auction item - trust me. It also doesn't achieve much and it takes cash away from other worthwhile projects. If Tom has a deal with ORA (sorry O'R) then it's his business, if I was him, and I'm not, I'd want to see the value of moving the domain name before even entering into the discussion, and currently perl.com offers good content. And the association with a large company like O'R is only good for Perl's reputation. Also perl.com is hosted at O'R's expense, with their design and development and it looks pretty good. And I personally trust them fully with the job. It's important to remember that there, imho, and Lenzo can disagree, would probably have been no YAPC if it wasn't for O'R and then probably no TPF at least with the sequence of events that led to it 'in this timeline' ;-). There is a lot of work to be done to help Perl, not least the core development that I believe is seeing less resource, and arguing about the ownership of a domain name and 2nd guessing what Tom is doing is a waste of our time. If you really want to help perl.com, perl.org or perlbuzz; write some articles that appeal to the wider world outside the goldfish bowl of the Perl community. Greg
Re: Perl is Alive!
On 8 Dec 2008, at 04:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The future is with the youth, and the solution is simple, as Tony said Education, Education, Education!. I beg to differ. Marketing, marketing, marketing. -- Mike Whitaker| Perl developer, writer, guitarist, photographer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Board member, http://www.enlightenedperl.org/ Y!: tuxservers | Blog: http://perlent.blogspot.com/ IRC: Penfold | Yahoo! UK Ltd - internal CMS team
Re: Perl is Alive!
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Mike Whitaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8 Dec 2008, at 04:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The future is with the youth, and the solution is simple, as Tony said Education, Education, Education!. I beg to differ. Marketing, marketing, marketing. Which in my dictionary is: Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!. Wow, that's what ruby is doing. -- Kent perl -e print substr( \edrgmaM SPA [EMAIL PROTECTED], \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 ); http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz
Re: Perl is Alive!
Obligatory Joel Spolsky quotation: (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/DevelopmentAbstraction.html) When uttered by a software developer, the term marketing simply stands in for all that business stuff: everything they don't actually understand about creating software and selling it. This, actually, is not really what marketing means. Actually Microsoft has pretty terrible marketing. Can you imagine those dinosaur ads actually making someone want to buy Microsoft Office? Software is a conversation, between the software developer and the user. But for that conversation to happen requires a lot of work beyond the software development. It takes marketing, yes, but also sales, and public relations, and an office, and a network, and infrastructure, and air conditioning in the office, and customer service, and accounting, and a bunch of other support tasks... HTH ti' On 8 Dec 2008, at 19:47, Kent Fredric wrote: On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Mike Whitaker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8 Dec 2008, at 04:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The future is with the youth, and the solution is simple, as Tony said Education, Education, Education!. I beg to differ. Marketing, marketing, marketing. Which in my dictionary is: Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!. Wow, that's what ruby is doing. -- Kent perl -e print substr( \edrgmaM SPA [EMAIL PROTECTED], \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 ); http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz
Re: Perl is Alive!
- Original Message From: Kent Fredric [EMAIL PROTECTED] The future is with the youth, and the solution is simple, as Tony said Education, Education, Education!. I beg to differ. Marketing, marketing, marketing. Which in my dictionary is: Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit!. Marketing is not inherently evil. Some people assume that because some marketing is bad, all is bad, but the little mom and pop shop on the corner taking out an ad saying buy local isn't evil, even though that's marketing. Can we PLEASE stop with the one size fits all idea of marketing? Blindly assuming marketing is bullshit doesn't help, just as blindly assuming it's a savior doesn't help. Cheers, Ovid -- Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/ Tech blog- http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/ Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6
Re: Perl is Alive!
Ovid wrote: Marketing is not inherently evil. Can I put in a plug for branding, too. A
Perl is Alive!
and kicking! Perl 5 doesn't need to be hip and new (like some people seem to think python and ruby are), Perl 6 will fix that Perl 5 is itself growing and evolving, bridging the gap to Perl 6 Parrot v1 is soon to hit the shelves Rakudo should be soon to follow The dusty old conservatives of the Perl community will slowly accept Perl 6 because it is a better *Perl* LPM seems to be slowly becoming more friendly to new comers (even Matt Trout was talking at LPW about new people getting involved and getting friendly support from the community) Newer groups like Italy, BBPM, etc, seem to be going from strength to strength A lot of new (and old) ideas are coming up... Some people will make attempts to take them forward... After all once it's started, you never know who'll help or finish it... Perl itself doesn't need to make changes to attract new programmers. Perl is great, that's why we are all here :) All we need is to make new people try coding Perl. Perl does the rest. Looking to hard at other languages and trying to pull programmers from them is futile (unless you are talking about ones like VB). The future is with the youth, and the solution is simple, as Tony said Education, Education, Education!. Perlbloke
