[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 3. Stuff that's very cool and I can see an application for but just
> Not This Week. Quantum::Superposition fits that niche, probably
> because it was so well explained :-) "any" and "all"cool. I'm
> sure Aspect would fall into this category if I'd been subjected to
Paul Makepeace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 12:25:46AM +0100, Tony Bowden wrote:
>> On Sat, Oct 27, 2001 at 04:22:06PM -0700, Paul Makepeace wrote:
>> > What did you tell them? I'm struggling to imagine they handed over money
>> > just by you giving them your name.
>>
>>
Sue Spence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > sorry :(
>
> http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/
Thanks. That cheered me up no end.
--
David Hodgkinson, Wizard for Hirehttp://www.davehodgkinson.com
Editor-in-chief, The Highway Star http://ww
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 07:42:43PM +, Simon Batistoni wrote:
> How about a pod section called something like CONTACT or FEEDBACK?
> Then authors could indicate on an individual basis how much or how
> little they wanted to hear. This would still leave room for Mark's
> "basic accounting" idea,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> sorry :(
http://www.thispagecannotbedisplayed.com/
sorry :(
On 28/10/01 13:38 +, Mark Fowler wrote:
> The problem as I see it here is that it's very hard for someone like me -
> a lowly module user - to know if emailing someone to thank them for their
> module is a good or a bad thing. To some people getting a mail saying
> that you're using their mod
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Damian Conway wrote:
> I guess it's very tough to know whether the silence is indifference
> or ingratitude.
> Though in fact I still answer
> every single email message I receive. The problem is, it sometimes takes
> me weeks to get through the daily deluge to any particula
On Fri, Oct 19, 2001 at 10:21:40PM +0100, Jonathan Stowe wrote:
>
> Software system design is often not an aesthetically pleasing thing -
> most of us are not involved directly with the creation of things like
> sendmail or bind or the FreeBSD kernel or whatever. What we do is not
> art, it is t
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Damian Conway wrote:
>
> Maybe if you released buggier modules, you'd get more feedback. ;-)
>
Someone said precisely the same thing when I brought this up on
clpmodules.
/J\
On Sunday, October 28, 2001, at 08:22 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> If there are cases where it could do the Thing Righter you should let
> me know.
> The current ToDo list includes:
>
> * honour POD
> * auto-detect-and-ignore Perl
> * auto-detect-and-perltidy Perl
...
> *
Marcel Grunauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's what these modules are: Experiments. Usually not things you
> can use right-away in production, more like proofs-of-concept;
> things that are based on experimental code themselves. Because of
> that they depend on feedback quite a lot; to see
On Tue, Oct 16, 2001 at 09:50:19AM +0100, Sam Vilain wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:32:12 -0700
> Paul Makepeace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Now, do you think that would cause a net negative, or positive effect
> > > on fornication?
> > I highly recommend google.
> > http://www.google.com
On Sunday, October 28, 2001, at 12:17 AM, Nik Butler wrote:
> Most of all though as your self this .
>
> Did you write your code for your benefit or theirs ?
I have asked myself that; certainly because I enjoy playing around
with new ideas and, as they say, to scratch an itch - so, for my
benef
[ big snip ]
Id like to add a different view point.
For quite a while until I met the likes of London PM and Neil (neh BinkyUK)
my approach to reporting Open Source based issues was based on experiences
from the closed source community.
e.g.
You can report it but your probably never likely to he
15 matches
Mail list logo
