Yeah, pre-date, post-date, whatever. Are you saying we should trust these people? Are you saying we should trust anyone funded by MS?
I'm saying that Sarathy's work on Perl, and his trustworthiness, have been sufficiently proven to my satisfaction. This is based on having actually dealt with the guy on a personal level, and from his history of contribution to Perl 5. Not from some hastily-drawn conclusions based on a single interview.
But then, what do I know? I've only been on the perl5 mailing list for about 3-4 years. I make my living writing Perl code. I've been a primarily-Perl developer for over 7 years. And I've never taken a dime from MS. In fact, I've never even bought any MS software products (though I've used them at work for inter-office mail and such).
Also, the guy worries me. He works for ActiveState. Blech.
Sarathy's involvement with Perl well pre-dates his employ at ActiveState. His working at ActiveState is what led to the two very diverse Win32 ports of Perl to combine. If it seems as though there is undue amount of attention being spent on WinNT/95/98 versions of Perl, it's because the others are for the most part stable. And the internal work being done is to the benefit of the Perl core, not just one port or the other.
| I, personally, am waiting to buy it from a | "brick-and-mortar" store... (If we don't | buy it, why should they carry it)... A point worth repeating. If people want to see software (in general, not just games) for Linux on the shelves, stores need to see that Linux-users are a viable market group. Randy
Re:This is just a basis to start 2.3 releases
on
Linux 2.3.0
·
· Score: 1
This is a shrewd move; Given that 2.1.0 is obviously still fresh on people's minds:-), it makes perfect sense to start 2.3 by checkpointing a stable kernel.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, pre-date, post-date, whatever.
Are you saying we should trust these people?
Are you saying we should trust anyone funded by MS?
I'm saying that Sarathy's work on Perl, and his trustworthiness, have been sufficiently proven to my satisfaction. This is based on having actually dealt with the guy on a personal level, and from his history of contribution to Perl 5. Not from some hastily-drawn conclusions based on a single interview.
But then, what do I know? I've only been on the perl5 mailing list for about 3-4 years. I make my living writing Perl code. I've been a primarily-Perl developer for over 7 years. And I've never taken a dime from MS. In fact, I've never even bought any MS software products (though I've used them at work for inter-office mail and such).
rjray
Also, the guy worries me. He works for ActiveState. Blech.
Sarathy's involvement with Perl well pre-dates his employ at ActiveState. His working at ActiveState is what led to the two very diverse Win32 ports of Perl to combine. If it seems as though there is undue amount of attention being spent on WinNT/95/98 versions of Perl, it's because the others are for the most part stable. And the internal work being done is to the benefit of the Perl core, not just one port or the other.
rjray> I'd rather live in the RDU area than any place :)
:-)
> on the west coast... it won't fall into the
> ocean any time soon.
Heh, from what I've seen these past few years, it doesn't have to. The ocean seems quite willing to come to you.
I prefer to *drink* my hurricanes, thank you
rjray
If this helps to confirm, I'm leaving my current contract position in the south bay to start a new position with them next Monday (the 26th).
:-)
rjray
| I, personally, am waiting to buy it from a
| "brick-and-mortar" store... (If we don't
| buy it, why should they carry it)...
A point worth repeating. If people want to see software (in general, not just games) for Linux on the shelves, stores need to see that Linux-users are a viable market group. Randy
This is a shrewd move; Given that 2.1.0 is obviously still fresh on people's minds :-), it makes perfect sense to start 2.3 by checkpointing a stable kernel.
Randy