Re: Can't download Rakudo Dec 2010 without git
On 01/04/2011 03:19 AM, gvim wrote: > Does this mean I have no option but to install git in order to keep my Perl 6 > up to date? No. You can download and install a release tarball of parrot, and then point rakudo's Configure.pl to the installed parrot. Only if you use the --gen-parrot option, git needs to be available. Cheers, Moritz
Can't download Rakudo Dec 2010 without git
OS X 10.6.4/Perl 5.12.2 (Macports) I've been able to install Rakudo so far without git, which I'm not fond of, but this time I received this error after downloading a tarball: Checking out Parrot RELEASE_2_11_0-478-gd69dbbc via git... Can't exec "git": No such file or directory at build/gen_parrot.pl line 104. Command failed (status -1): git clone git://github.com/parrot/parrot.git parrot Error while executing perl build/gen_parrot.pl --prefix=/Users/gmac/pl6/parrot_install --optimize --optimize; aborting Does this mean I have no option but to install git in order to keep my Perl 6 up to date? gvim
Re: Questions for Survey about Perl
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 8:27 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote: >> So I'd change that to "after a production release of a Perl 6 compiler" > > I think I'll include both answers. > If we learn that people desperately need a 1.0 numbering then the > Rakudo developers > can make up their mind to either change the numbering scheme or invest more > in education of the users. Maybe pointing out that after releasing > 2011.01 you can't release 1.0. :) Not much chance of "educating" users. Release numbers have more or less established standard meanings. It is impossible or impractical for someone to be "educated" about the idiosyncratic numbering scheme of every product they use. That's why there are standards, even if they are informal. The "1.0 = ready" standard is well established in the FOSS world (it even gets a paragraph in ESR's The Cathedral and The Bazaar). People are not wrong to expect that "1.0" is the sign that the product is ready and that 0.x means that it's still in a state of flux. FOSS numbering standards go further than that. It is extremely common that products be numbered X.Y.Z where Y even indicates "stable version" and Y odd indicates "development version". Perl 5 switched to this numbering scheme years ago precisely because people were familiar with it and understood it. > ps. In Padre I try to stick to the "increase by 0.01 and not jump to 1.00". > It is surprising how many people tell us "I'll use Padre once 1.0 is > released". > I can't even imagine how many people think the same but don't tell us. Look at it from my point of view: I don't have time or energy to join the Padre development list and track its progress in order to decide for myself if it is ready for use. I certainly don't have the time or energy or inclination to do that for every single software product I use. I will make exceptions for software that has a very long history. I have no doubt that Emacs and Vi are stable, so I don't care what their numbering scheme is. But for stuff that is new enough to make me wonder, I will tend to wait for 1.0. Daniel. -- No trees were destroyed in the generation of this email. However, a large number of electrons were severely inconvenienced.
Re: Questions for Survey about Perl
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Gabor Szabo wrote: > I think it largely depends on who do you ask and I believe there will > be a huge gap between private people and company people. Or between > people who are involved in open source development and in-house developers. I don't see the open source vs in-house point you are trying to make, but I still agree with the general point that "production" partly depends who you ask and what they need it for. For example, I expect that most companies would tolerate more bugs in a program for internal use than in a program intended for paying customers. That said, I tried to give a vague notion in my earlier post. "Production" means that the developers have given me some sort of verbal assurance that the product is reasonably stable and can be relied on to reasonably work as documented. > Some kind of an official blessing is needed by most of us. This can > be Larry for Perl or Patrick for Rakudo or having it > "supplied by our vendor" (e.g. Ubuntu, Red Hat or ActiveState). Yeah, something like that. Daniel. -- No trees were destroyed in the generation of this email. However, a large number of electrons were severely inconvenienced.
