develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from August 2023

Re: I partially disavow (was Re: PPC Elevator Pitch for Perl::Types)

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Oodler 577 via perl5-porters
August 19, 2023 18:47
Re: I partially disavow (was Re: PPC Elevator Pitch for Perl::Types)
Message ID:
You called me out here, so I am going to reply. This time on my
own behalf, Darren. I have no hard feelings, you have to make your
decisions. None of this is personal for me and should not be for
anyone else.

You're welcome back at any time. We have a very transparent and
unapologetic operation. We're not perfect, but we are striving for
virtue like all good humans; for me it is important that we work
on humilty and meekness. But perseverence and fortitude are also
very important to me. I also get it, this brand of approach makes
people very uncomfortable and is a threat. If this model proves to
be an effective way to refine Perl, then you can bet it will be
used again by us for other things; and it is my hope, emulated by

If anyone is interested in being part of the Perl::Types Committee
moving forward, please let me know. We have regular meetings and
formal levels of membership depending on interest, intellectual
contributions, and actual time given. Membership works by existing
members "sponsoring" (or vouching for) existing members. Provided
you are sincerely interested in working Perl::Type and benefitting
Perl, I would be very happy to vouch for anyone who is interested
and on P5P at this time. Please send me a direct email if so.


PS: Certain individuals have provided useful feedback here. We are
currently reading it, and will be preparing a response (yes as a
committee). Please be patience, we are finding it does take time
to work this way. But the fruits of this approach, particularly in
this environment, are already being shown to be good. Please continue
to send your feedback. I would like to say, thousands of lines of
code already have existed for years via RPerl. You will see this
is true by visiting the provided links. It should strike you as
sufficiently real should you take some time to view the unit tests.

* Darren Duncan <> [2023-08-19 04:07:29 -0700]:

> On 2023-08-15 9:37 p.m., Oodler 577 via perl5-porters wrote:
> > # Proposed Perl Changes Elevator Pitch for Perl::Types
> > ...
> > Respectfully submitted by the _Perl::Types Committee_:
> > ...
> > * Darren Duncan (DUNCAND)
> I want to state for the record that I partially disavow both this proposal
> and this group.
> I have also, just before writing this current message, formally departed
> from the group, and asked that my name be removed from its membership list.
> I joined the Perl::Types Committee about 1-2 weeks ago, when the current
> incarnation was formed, when Will invited me, because I had a personal
> interest in Perl type systems and felt I could benefit the Perl community
> through participation in the multiple efforts under way, including this one;
> I had likewise also provided feedback to Oshun, and before that Corinna.
> I did provide input and feedback during the last 1-2 weeks, which I hope
> will make the Perl::Types effort better for the community.
> While I support some aspects of its goals, providing more direct, efficient,
> and strict access to Perl's existing built-in type system for Perl
> developers, I also disagree with other aspects of the initiative, including
> a seeming lack of desire to compromise with others.
> While my input to the group seemed to be generally appreciated, some
> proposals that were more compromising in nature and respecting feedback
> given here, were vocally disagreed with.
> For example, I proposed using a branded namespace, such as LLPT:: (Low Level
> Perl Types) for all its packages like integer/boolean/string etc to
> expressly avoid conflict with other namespaces.
> I decided I don't want my name associated with this endeavor as a whole,
> even if I support some of its goals.
> I believe that in principle the alternative Oshun proposal can provide all
> the actually workable features of Perl::Types as a subset of its feature
> set, and do so in a way that goes out of its way to play nice with
> everything else.
> Oshun's built-in checks should have a set that correspond to stricter
> definitions of Perl's built-in types; I'm not a stickler for their having
> particular names, just that they are available.  But getting into that
> belongs on the Oshun Git discussions where input is generally being taken,
> rather than in this perl5-porters thread.
> Also, as far as I know, from the Git change history for the draft version of
> this elevator pitch, Will and Brett are the only ones that actually authored
> it directly, with the rest of our names being on it because we were in the
> group.
> I was actually surprised that all the names were on this when it was
> submitted to perl5-porters, I didn't expect that the Committee member list
> was going to be announced, and assumed it was private.
> Apparently we had all assented to it though because we saw a review of the
> draft first and didn't object to its content, including the member name
> list.
> This is partially my fault though, I had somehow glossed over the fact it
> contained a full member list, so I didn't think to request that the names of
> non-authors be excluded when I had the chance.
> Going forward, I request that everyone treat me as if my name had never been
> announced on the Perl::Types Committee member list.
> Instead please treat me as my own person with my own interests and opinions,
> which case by case may or may not align with particular individuals.
> This says nothing about any relationships I may have with any individuals,
> but just with this Committee as its own entity, and with the current
> elevator pitch.
> Thank you.
> -- Darren Duncan

SDF-EU Public Access UNIX System - #openmp #pdl #native

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