Re: TPF donations (was Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes])
David Storrs wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the one thing that all those projects have in common...well...Perl? And isn't Larry the guy to whom we owe the existence of Perl? I'm not fortunate enough to be using Perl in my job, but I'm still more than happy to pony up for a donation, purely from gratitude. This is something along the lines of the applied research vs basic research question. What Larry is doing pretty much amounts to basic research that will help all of these other projects in the long run. This is my view as well, but I can understand that it may not be everyone's (including the TPF's). At the moment, TPF is preparing to set up an on-line questionnaire to get feedback from the community on what it's priorities should be. Then we will all have our chance to have our say. Damian
Re: TPF donations (was Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes])
On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 02:21:58PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote: > > --- David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is something along the lines of the applied research vs basic > > research question. What Larry is doing pretty much amounts to basic > > research that will help all of these other projects in the long run. > > Sure. But managing the funding budget isn't a business, where basic > research will enable more income. It's the allocation of scarce I'm not convinced that that is correct. Basic research may enable more income. If it works. But at least 90% of basic research won't. Hence you have to do a lot of it, but the odd time you get it right, it can be very lucrative > resources. And from that viewpoint, Larry and P6 is an iceberg, just > cruising along hoping to gash a massive hole in the support/maintenance > schedule, because once P6 rolls all the other stuff has to be sorted, > ported, and supported. I'm not quite following you - this looks like an argument against P6, because its appearance will create a lot more work? > If I was in charge of the TPF funding budget, I'd be yearning to pick > up the phone whenever I saw an episode of "The Sopranos"(*)... And this I don't follow at all, having never seen The Sopranos. So I'm probably completely failing to address the points you are making The problem I see with not funding Larry, is that if as a consequence Larry has to get a job that prevents him from working on Perl 6, Perl 6 won't happen until he retires. Anyone can implement Perl 6 (although I reckon we'd have a setback of many months on parrot if Dan stopped and left, and more if other people dropped out as a result. But it can be picked up by anyone capable). Not just anyone can design Perl 6. The obvious counter argument is that if Perl 6 stops, Perl 5 as is won't go away; Perl 5 is what we have; Perl 5 is what we are using, and Perl 5 is good enough. However eventually everyone volunteering to work on it will drift away. At which point it is stagnant, and no bugs get fixed. For some reason, Perl 6 actually brought a lot of new blood and new momentum to Perl 5. I suspect Perl 5.8 would not have happened, or at least not have happened yet, had Perl 6 not been around. Perl 6 may seem crazy, far fetched and long term. Yet it is bringing morale to Perl 5, suggesting that Perl does have a future, and that maybe Perl 5 is worth working on. If Perl 5 doesn't feel worth working on, then most will go away. I've been involved in development communities before where the future has been pulled out from under our feet. The community dissipates - there is more fun to be had elsewhere. You may think that volunteers on Perl 5 are not important. You may not be using Perl 5.8, and you may see no need to. Ever. But if you're using 5.004, 5.005_03 or 5.6.1, and you have hit a bug in it, how are you going to get it fixed? Currently bugs discovered in 5.8 are actively being fixed (or at least ought to be - nag p5p if they aren't). But a release of 5.6.2 looks unlikely, and 5.005_04 equally improbable. How would you feel if there was never going to be a 5.8.1 either? Would it affect your technology choice? Would it affect your clients'/employers'? Hence I would argue that if Perl 6 halts, Perl 5 stops looking credible long term. Which I don't want to happen. Currently this argument is shaky, because to an external observer, Larry with funding unable to produce apocolypses due to other reasons is indistinguishable from Larry unable to produce apocolypses due to lack of funding. Except that there is visibly less money for anything else worthy. Nicholas Clark
Re: TPF donations (was Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes])
--- David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote: > > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > > > Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed > more > > > deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for > Perl, > > > right? > > > > True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many people, > Perl 6 is > > far less important than mod_Perl, or DBI, or HTML::Mason, or POE, > or PDL, or > > Inline, or SpamAssassin, or XML::Parser, or YAML, or the Slashcode, > or any of > > a hundred other projects on which their job depends on a daily > basis. > > > > Supporting those efforts is important too, and TPF has only limited > resources. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the one thing that all those > projects have in common...well...Perl? And isn't Larry the guy to > whom we owe the existence of Perl? I'm not fortunate enough to be > using Perl in my job, but I'm still more than happy to pony up for a > donation, purely from gratitude. > > This is something along the lines of the applied research vs basic > research question. What Larry is doing pretty much amounts to basic > research that will help all of these other projects in the long run. Sure. But managing the funding budget isn't a business, where basic research will enable more income. It's the allocation of scarce resources. And from that viewpoint, Larry and P6 is an iceberg, just cruising along hoping to gash a massive hole in the support/maintenance schedule, because once P6 rolls all the other stuff has to be sorted, ported, and supported. If I was in charge of the TPF funding budget, I'd be yearning to pick up the phone whenever I saw an episode of "The Sopranos"(*)... =Austin
TPF donations (was Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes])
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote: > Paul Johnson wrote: > > > Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed more > > deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for Perl, > > right? > > True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many people, Perl 6 is > far less important than mod_Perl, or DBI, or HTML::Mason, or POE, or PDL, or > Inline, or SpamAssassin, or XML::Parser, or YAML, or the Slashcode, or any of > a hundred other projects on which their job depends on a daily basis. > > Supporting those efforts is important too, and TPF has only limited resources. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the one thing that all those projects have in common...well...Perl? And isn't Larry the guy to whom we owe the existence of Perl? I'm not fortunate enough to be using Perl in my job, but I'm still more than happy to pony up for a donation, purely from gratitude. This is something along the lines of the applied research vs basic research question. What Larry is doing pretty much amounts to basic research that will help all of these other projects in the long run. --Dks
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 02:11:37AM +, Simon Cozens wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Johnson) writes: > > That may well be true, but it seems to me that if people's jobs depend > > on those projects then there is (or could be or should be) a source of > > funding available, should such be required, namely the companies who are > > (hopefully) making a profit on the backs of those projects. Hey! You carefully elided my disclaimer. > And to what organisation do you suggest such companies make a donation in > order to make best use of that funding? It seems to me that TPC would be the perfect vehicle for any company wishing to fund a specific Perl project. Previous disclaimer still applies. But now we are off topic. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Johnson) writes: > That may well be true, but it seems to me that if people's jobs depend > on those projects then there is (or could be or should be) a source of > funding available, should such be required, namely the companies who are > (hopefully) making a profit on the backs of those projects. And to what organisation do you suggest such companies make a donation in order to make best use of that funding? -- "Don't worry about people stealing your ideas. If your ideas are any good, you'll have to ram them down people's throats." -- Howard Aiken
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes: > True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many people, Perl 6 is > far less important than mod_Perl, or DBI, or HTML::Mason, or POE, or > PDL, or Inline, or SpamAssassin, or XML::Parser, or YAML, or the > Slashcode, or any of a hundred other projects on which their job > depends on a daily basis. Amen to that. -- DISCLAIMER: Use of this advanced computing technology does not imply an endorsement of Western industrial civilization.
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 04:21:08PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote: > True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many people, Perl 6 is > far less important than mod_Perl, or DBI, or HTML::Mason, or POE, or PDL, > or Inline, or SpamAssassin, or XML::Parser, or YAML, or the Slashcode, or > any of a hundred other projects on which their job depends on a daily basis. That may well be true, but it seems to me that if people's jobs depend on those projects then there is (or could be or should be) a source of funding available, should such be required, namely the companies who are (hopefully) making a profit on the backs of those projects. Yes, I know it's not that easy. No one's job depends on Perl 6 or Parrot (yet). Well, hardly anyone's :) Still, I suppose I am preaching to the choir in the wrong chapel. -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
Paul Johnson wrote: Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed more deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for Perl, right? True. But I suspect that TPF's position is that, to many people, Perl 6 is far less important than mod_Perl, or DBI, or HTML::Mason, or POE, or PDL, or Inline, or SpamAssassin, or XML::Parser, or YAML, or the Slashcode, or any of a hundred other projects on which their job depends on a daily basis. Supporting those efforts is important too, and TPF has only limited resources. Of course, it's my belief that supporting Larry (and Dan) to create Perl 6 is the single most important thing that TPF could do. Because, ultimately, it will benefit all those other projects enormously too. But I'm clearly biased. :-) Damian
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 03:10:48PM -0800, Damian Conway wrote: > It's my understanding that TPF is not intending to offer Larry (or Dan) > another grant for 2003. They feel that too many people have come to see > TPF's role and contribution to have been limited to Perl 6 (though > funding Dan was in fact supporting the much broader benefits of Parrot > development and funding me probably benefitted Perl 5 even more than Perl > 6). Well, I'll be pretty interested to discover what cause is deemed more deserving than Larry, Perl 6 or Parrot. The P still stands for Perl, right? -- Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pjcj.net
Re: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
We should bear in mind that Larry has had some health issues. And that he's currently unemployed with four children to support. Other matters are taking precedence at the moment. Hmm... If the Larry and the Perl Foundation would be agreeable. I'd just as soon see a grant set up for Larry again this year. And if so, I'd like to see the Perl Foundation grant(s) publicized before tax-deductable donations to non-profit organizations can no longer be applied to 2002. It's my understanding that TPF is not intending to offer Larry (or Dan) another grant for 2003. They feel that too many people have come to see TPF's role and contribution to have been limited to Perl 6 (though funding Dan was in fact supporting the much broader benefits of Parrot development and funding me probably benefitted Perl 5 even more than Perl 6). However, I am sure they would welcome feedback on what the community would actually like to donate towards: http://www.perlfoundation.org/index.cgi?page=contacts If so, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to match last years' contribution. [People may not realize what a very generous offer that is. Garrett has been a *major* contributer in the past. And, unless he's living in a parallel economic dimension, funds must be tighter this year.] Damian
RE: L2R/R2L syntax [x-adr][x-bayes]
From: Damian Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > We should bear in mind that Larry has had some health issues. > And that he's currently unemployed with four children to support. > Other matters are taking precedence at the moment. Hmm... If the Larry and the Perl Foundation would be agreeable. I'd just as soon see a grant set up for Larry again this year. And if so, I'd like to see the Perl Foundation grant(s) publicized before tax-deductable donations to non-profit organizations can no longer be applied to 2002. If so, I'm pretty sure I'll be able to match last years' contribution. -- Garrett Goebel IS Development Specialist ScriptPro Direct: 913.403.5261 5828 Reeds Road Main: 913.384.1008 Mission, KS 66202 Fax: 913.384.2180 www.scriptpro.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
