Updating http://history.perl.org/PerlTimeline.html

On 26 Apr, 2008, at 20:53, Andy Lester wrote:

>
> On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:39 PM, Elaine Ashton wrote:
> 
>
>
> Sounds like it's time to start a new history wiki page and go
> forward from there.

You know, my toddler has more social skills than you as although she
thinks everything is hers, she can be placated with a snack and/or a
nap and, in fact, I told the person who forwarded the message that I
was mostly pissed that nobody had come forward after all these years
and that the only two people I'd say no first to would be you and
Shlomi only because you are both so abrasive and so lacking in any
tact that I wouldn't welcome the offer with glee.

As ever, the put up or shut up rule works pretty well as someone who
doesn't come offering something to lend confidence generally is only
a wind-up merchant who languishes in the actual work.

Still grumpy,

e.

>>> Sounds like it's time to start a new history wiki page and go 
>
> You know, my toddler has more social skills than you as although she
> thinks everything is hers, she can be placated with a snack and/or a
> nap and, in fact, I told the person who forwarded the message that I
> was mostly pissed that nobody had come forward after all these years
> and that the only two people I'd say no first to would be you and
> Shlomi only because you are both so abrasive and so lacking in any
> tact that I wouldn't welcome the offer with glee.


Not sure why you're pissed at me, other than reflex.

I just figure it would be easier all around to move forward with a new
document, or set of documents, rather than battle over the existing one.

--
Andy Lester => andy@petdance.com => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance

On Apr 26, 2008, at 10:40 PM, Andy Lester wrote:
>
> On Apr 26, 2008, at 10:00 PM, Elaine Ashton wrote:
> 
>
>
> Not to speak for Shlomi, but I suspect his purpose of putting
> something on a wiki isn't to get other people to do the work for
> him, but to allow others to work on it.  Makes it much easier to
> let things be maintained rather than having something lie fallow
> for six years.
>

To be clear, the wiki proposal was mine (for better or worse) not
Shlomi's.  Shlomi responded lukewarmly toward the proposal.
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl...04/msg2404.html

The value I see in wikis is not that hundreds of people can edit
(i.e. regress a document toward the mean), but that some can walk
away when they are done editing.

Chris

On 27 Apr 2008, at 04:00, Elaine Ashton wrote: 
>
> I'm stating the obvious and my opinion. Both of you are terrific at
> stirring the shit and then letting it fall to the winds. I'd have a
> lot more interest if either of you had anything but ideas because
> someone who wasn't talking out their ass would have not only a lot
> more interesting comments but would have both a lot more respect for
> the document and a lot more reluctance towards the amount of work it
> will require.


What a bizarre attack Elaine. Andy and Shlomi both do more than their
fair share of doing. And from a fairly dispassionate perspective it
seems to be your social skills that are overtaxed right now :)

--
Andy Armstrong, Hexten

On 26 Apr, 2008, at 23:52, Chris Dolan wrote:
>
> I also apologize for my stream-of-consciousness comments that
> started with "ugh" and ended with me acknowledging the value of the
> timeline.  The "ugh" came from reading 1969-1986, which seemed to
> have minimal relevance to Perl.  I should have written that more
> tactfully, making my respect more clear.

Wow, you think that maybe "Ugh" might not be all that flattering a
comment? Perhaps there has been some progress afterall. Don't worry,
nobody has really noticed it for a decade and, if the cyclical nature
of this sort of thing holds, after all the fuss over the timeline it
will return to its obscurity until someone else needs a fallow
project to bash.

I believe my no was very clear. No wiki. I'm not a big fan of them to
begin with and certainly not in this context.

I'll welcome updates.

I'll welcome fixed links and html.

I'll welcome new content.

If anything comes from that which, again, as my cynical assessment
has proven time and again that such will not be forthcoming, I'll
entertain further ideas.

e.

On 27 Apr, 2008, at 7:24, Andy Armstrong wrote:
>
> What a bizarre attack Elaine. Andy and Shlomi both do more than
> their fair share of doing. And from a fairly dispassionate
> perspective it seems to be your social skills that are overtaxed
> right now :)

I stand by my comments.

I have social skills, but it's more efficient to be blunt around
neanderthals. :)

e.

On Apr 27, 2008, at 8:40 AM, Elaine Ashton wrote:
>
> On 26 Apr, 2008, at 23:52, Chris Dolan wrote: 
>
> Wow, you think that maybe "Ugh" might not be all that flattering a
> comment? Perhaps there has been some progress afterall. Don't
> worry, nobody has really noticed it for a decade and, if the
> cyclical nature of this sort of thing holds, after all the fuss
> over the timeline it will return to its obscurity until someone
> else needs a fallow project to bash.
>
> I believe my no was very clear. No wiki. I'm not a big fan of them
> to begin with and certainly not in this context.
>
> I'll welcome updates.
>
> I'll welcome fixed links and html.
>
> I'll welcome new content.
>
> If anything comes from that which, again, as my cynical assessment
> has proven time and again that such will not be forthcoming, I'll
> entertain further ideas.
>
> e.

Elaine,

I offered you a very thorough apology.  Are you going to accept it
and move on, or continue to flame me?

Chris

On 27 Apr, 2008, at 9:58, Chris Dolan wrote:
>
> I offered you a very thorough apology.  Are you going to accept it
> and move on, or continue to flame me?

You must be reasonably new around these parts. That wasn't a flame,
at least not from me. :)

Just put up or shut up.

e.

Hi Elaine!

I'm terribly sorry for not trying harder to contact you earlier, and for
announcing my intentions to the list. I'm really appreciative of all the
great work you've put into the Perl Timeline up to now. See below for the
rest of my response.

On Sunday 27 April 2008, Elaine Ashton wrote:
> Oh, god, someone did a bad thing and forwarded me an email from this
> infernal list that I had been blissfully unsubscribed to for...well,
> a really long time now.

I agree that advocacy@perl.org can become a bit political, especially since
I've joined.

> In spite of having given birth and spending
> the past 18 months being a mum

Congratulations!

> I have not completely lost my
> character so those who are sensitive to my usual missives should
> probably brace yourselves.
>
> Firstly, I have waited for a very long time for maintainers to step
> up for a number of things, including the history project. Perhaps I
> should write a manual with RULE NUMBER ONE: DON'T INSULT THE PROJECT
> YOU ARE WANTING TO ASSUME CONTROL OF AND CLAIM YOU TRIED TO GET IN
> TOUCH WITH ONE OF THE MOST EASILY FOUND PEOPLE ON THE NET BUT SOMEHOW
> MANAGED TO FAIL.

Well, I googled for your name:

http://www.google.com/search?q=elai...=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

The most conclusive link I could find was
http://search.cpan.org/~hfb/Date-Christmas-1.02/ which pointed me to
hfb@cpan.org which bounced. Please try to use the pause.perl.org interface t
o
point it to your newer address.

I admit I haven't tried too hard, and I apologise for that.

> What, do I have to expain this to you idiots? Do you
> XXXXX about a meal from your mother and offer to recook it, too? Not
> to mention, my email address is everywhere (and plenty of other
> people manage to find me daily) and while I probably should have your
> address on a kill filter, I don't as I have better things to do these
> days.

Sorry again.

>
> "In any case, I first want to get the legal status of the document
> cleared
> before we wikify it."
>
> NO.
>
> I'd welcome an update to the HTML if it has fallen out of valid HTML.
> I'd welcome updated links for dead ones and I'd welcome a new version
> with events up to the current time. I would not be interested
> currently in opening it up to a wiki to a throng of people who either
> have an agenda or no idea just how much time it takes/took to prepare
> a document like this.

You are right that using a wiki for it may open up a wealth of problems. I'v
e
witnessed such problems first-hand with some of my experiences on
en.wikipedia.org, he.wikipedia.org, perl.net.au, and other wikis.

>
> Send me something I can look at and update the site with, otherwise
> I'm simply not interested.

You are right, I will. I should note that because of the conversion to XHTML
1.1 (valid now) etc. the patch will be very huge, so I'll just send you the
new file. You can find it here:

http://www.shlomifish.org/perl-time...rlTimeline.html

I can send a patch from the first XHTML'ed version to the present version if
you'd prefer. I can also send the Subversion dump of the repository I've bee
n
maintaining the HTML of the page in.

>
> As ever, don't talk about a patch, send me a patch and we'll see.

I see.

Again, I'm sorry. The wiki'ing idea was not mine, but I found it a bit
tempting.

All that was said, I would still to contribute to the new Perl history effor
t
on the TPF wiki. While I highly commend you for the effort you've put into
the existing timeline, it's highly possible a collaboration between Andy
Lester, Chris Dolan and I (and other people of the Perl community) can yeild
something substantial and under a more usable licensing terms. We are going
to respect the copyrights ownership of the existing timeline and not re-use
material from there directly, without your permission.

Thanks, best regards, and sorry again,

Shlomi Fish

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish       http://www.shlomifish.org/
Rethinking CPAN - http://xrl.us/bjn7p

The bad thing about hardware is that it sometimes work and sometimes doesn't
.
The good thing about software is that it's consistent: it always does not
work, and it always does not work in exactly the same way.

On 27 Apr, 2008, at 15:43, Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> I agree that advocacy@perl.org can become a bit political,
> especially since
> I've joined.

Perl is little but politics. The same social dysfunctions that
existed at the announcement of the P6 fork that led me to say that it
would never come to fruition still exist, much like, say, this entire
thread.

> Sorry again.

What are you sorry for? The lot of you got what you wanted in the
end, so what? It is the perl way that no good deed go unpunished.
Sorry is a little late and a bit meaningless at this point.

> You are right that using a wiki for it may open up a wealth of
> problems. I've
> witnessed such problems first-hand with some of my experiences on
> en.wikipedia.org, he.wikipedia.org, perl.net.au, and other wikis.

An unmoderated wiki, or even a moderated one, in a perl context in
largely doomed on something as subjective as the history.

> You are right, I will. I should note that because of the conversion
> to XHTML
> 1.1 (valid now) etc. the patch will be very huge, so I'll just send
> you the
> new file. You can find it here:
>
> http://www.shlomifish.org/perl-time...rlTimeline.html

Thanks, I'll look at it later tonight when I have time and the urge
to consume an entire bottle of Ardbeg has subsided. :)

> All that was said, I would still to contribute to the new Perl
> history effort
> on the TPF wiki. While I highly commend you for the effort you've
> put into
> the existing timeline, it's highly possible a collaboration between
> Andy
> Lester, Chris Dolan and I (and other people of the Perl community)
> can yeild
> something substantial and under a more usable licensing terms. We
> are going
> to respect the copyrights ownership of the existing timeline and
> not re-use
> material from there directly, without your permission.

You know, that timeline has sat there for nearly a decade and I don't
understand this bizarre BS over the license. You know, do you drive
over the cliff before looking for a bridge?

When you get to the P6 history bits, I'll be sure to have the popcorn
and beer ready as this will be one seriously entertaining
flamewar. :) May the force be with you.

e.