Front page | perl.ponie.dev |
Postings from January 2004
From: Tim Bunce
January 13, 2004 07:36
Message ID: 20040113153623.GA41964@dansat.data-plan.com
On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 04:24:39PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 8:34 PM +0000 1/12/04, Tim Bunce wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 01:05:42PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> At 12:57 PM -0500 1/12/04, Josh Wilmes wrote:
> >> >What's the current state of ponie at this point? Are there any areas
> >> where
> >> >assistance is needed?
> >> >
> >> >I'm sure i'm not the only one who would like to see some non-trivial
> >> code
> >> >running on parrot sooner rather than later.
> >> Define "non-trivial" here. (Would 168K of bytecode, with ncurses and
> >> postgres interfaces, count?)
> >Of course.
> You've not seen DecisionPlus. :)
> >But firstname.lastname@example.org has been very quiet. There doesn't seem to
> >be a community of developers or much visible effort to create one.
> Last I knew, this was more of an announcement list until Arthur had
> things in a state where multiple people could reasonably work on the
> code. Whether that's a good or bad idea, well... not going there.
> (It's been a day to avoid things for me, I see) His use.perl status
> reports, or more frequent and rougher notes, would be handy to have
> here, though.
That would be good.
I've not see use.perl status reports (I don't get to use.perl as
often as I'd like) and searching for ponie on use.perl returns
little beyond tangental mentions in "This Week on perl5-porters".
And ponie isn't listed as a topic on http://use.perl.org/topics.shtml
While Arthur is undoubtably very able it seems odd that he's working
is such apparent isolation.
Are there no design decisions that would benefit from wider discusion?
If it's only "grunt work" at the moment couldn't others help out?