develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from October 2012

Re: What happened to the whole "small core" idea?

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Peter Rabbitson
October 28, 2012 08:58
Re: What happened to the whole "small core" idea?
Message ID:
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 02:32:23AM +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 27 October 2012 03:41, Peter Rabbitson <> wrote:
> > Peter Rabbitson
> > Concerned Citizen of the Republic of Perl
> I think I've seen somewhat structural changes to how Perl is packaged,
> which seem to be small progressive iterations towards a possible
> future where perl is essentially a minimal VM + a standard library ,
> but seperating the standard library from perl at present seems a hard
> task.
> I feel that in the future, we may eventually see the development model
> for most of the "Features" that are part of perl move away from being
> perl-itself, and instead focused on this standard library.
> I think your basic frustration stems from expecting to see this "now",
> but it not being "here" "now", but I am confident I see small changes
> happening that are moving in the direction you hope for, just its
> slower than you might want.

If you reread my email more carefully you will notice that I do 
recognize and commend these changes. Nor am I complaining that changes 
to the VM to facilitate a new dimension of experimentations are not 
there yet. My problem is that a small group of porters believes it is ok 
to experiment "in production", while these prerequisites are not 
available. And that a much larger group of porters sanctions this 
implicitly by simply being silent.

> I should also point out, that the large crowds of crickets sitting on
> the sidelines not saying anything is not nessecarily a lack of care on
> the subject, but a lack of desire to communicate.
> Writing big formalised emails can be a time consuming task

It didn't take me 10 minutes to write my original email. Nor am I 
expecting the average porter to set time aside to write their thoughts. 
Furthermore as you can see the "progress police" is already on my case, 
so I either drop it or I write another structured reply. What I was 
really complaining about is that *nobody* does this.

Yet I recognize a very good point in your and bulk88's replies - it is 
too damn time consuming to slap some eager chap on the hand and say "Not 
yet". I have discussed this previously (IIRC offlist) with some porters. 
And sadly I do not have an answer. Doesn't mean I and others must stop 
highlighting the issue though... does it?


Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About