Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2009
Re: Perl 5.10.1
From: Michael G Schwern
June 20, 2009 13:43
Re: Perl 5.10.1
Message ID: 4A3D49FB.firstname.lastname@example.org
Jonathan Leto wrote:
> As an exercise, I checked out the perl-5.10 git tag and then
> cherry-picked Rick Delaney's "Big slowdown in 5.10 @_ parameter
> passing " commit . I ran all the tests and they pass on my machine.
> Obviously a bit more smoke testing is needed, but I took this as a
> good sign.
> This is in response to chromatic's comments :
> Is pointing out that a patch for a known performance regression
> languishing, unreleased, in bleadperl for 17 months a problem? Is that
> criticism dismissible from everyone who isn't currently a Perl 5
> committer or the maintainer of a core module?
> I think that releasing Perl 5.10.1 with only this change is very
> valuable to the Perl community, so I went and tried to help it along.
> Is this a viable option?
I'm all for it. We've got this wonderful new version control system that lets
us do exactly this sort of thing, cherry pick a few critical changes and
squeeze out a quick stable release. The work can be parallelized now that the
repository is available to all, and Jonathan just did that. Nick has been
wondering if moving to git was worth it and here it is.
We all want smaller, faster releases. Here's one. Unless there's something
wrong with the patch, I'd encourage the pumpking to increment the version
numbers, write up the smallest perldelta ever and ship 5.10.1. Doesn't need a
lot of balleyhoo, just make it available to those who need it.
If you want the truth to stand clear before you, never be for or against.
The struggle between "for" and "against" is the mind's worst disease.