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

On Sunday 27 April 2008 21:43:35 Shlomi Fish wrote:
>
> the conversion to XHTML
> 1.1 (valid now) etc. the patch will be very huge, so I'll just send you th
e
> new file. You can find it here:
>
> http://www.shlomifish.org/perl-time...rlTimeline.html
>
Excellent work.

> 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 yei
ld
> something substantial and under a more usable licensing terms. We are goin
g
> to respect the copyrights ownership of the existing timeline and not re-us
e
> material from there directly, without your permission.
>
It's a real shame the perl6 people seem to be incapable of using the work fr
om
the perl5 people - or have I misread the thread?

I mean, Elaine sounds a bit pissed off, but I'm not really surprised when sh
e
gets her project whipped from under her feet.  Never mind that it's not been
updated for a while - surely we should respect her 'ownership' of that corne
r
and work to get co-editing facilities of it in some way, much like when
Michael gave out commit bits for the Test::More code to a choice group of
interested individuals some time ago.  This kind of thing happens all the
time, it's called co-operation.

I don't see why we have to trash the old stuff, just because certain people
have positions of power and can (ab-)use it to side-step the issue.

Just my four-penneth!

--
Richard Foley
Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen

http://www.rfi.net/

> but I'm not really surprised when she
> gets her project whipped from under her feet.


No one is stopping any other project from doing anything.  Nobody is
taking away any projects from anyone else.

Plurality is the nature of open source, and it's an additive process,
not a subtractive one.  Template Toolkit doesn't take away from
Mason.  Devel::*Prof don't take away from Devel::DProf.  Perlbuzz
doesn't take away from use.perl.org.  Perl 6 doesn't take away from
Perl 5.  Perl didn't take away from awk and shell.  vim doesn't take
away from emacs.

I'll say it again in the land of the free
Use your freedom of choice

xoxo,
Andy

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

On Monday 28 April 2008 16:23:35 Andy Lester wrote:
> 
>
> No one is stopping any other project from doing anything.  Nobody is
> taking away any projects from anyone else.
>
There are many ways to skin a cat.

> I'll say it again in the land of the free
>
If it is the land of the free, which I doubt.

--
Richard Foley
Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen

http://www.rfi.net/

>From: Andy Lester <andy@petdance.com>

>Plurality is the nature of open source, and it's an additive process,
>not a subtractive one.  Template Toolkit doesn't take away from
>Mason.  Devel::*Prof don't take away from Devel::DProf.  Perlbuzz
>doesn't take away from use.perl.org.  Perl 6 doesn't take away from
>Perl 5.  Perl didn't take away from awk and shell.  vim doesn't take
>away from emacs.

I think this is a bit oversimplified. These things can and do take resources
 from each other, whether we like to admit it or not. That taking of resourc
es can leave a better final state than when we began, but at a cost.

On Monday 28 April 2008 18:03:23 Shlomi Fish wrote:
> 
>
> Thanks.
>
Well, I started to revise it myself once, but didn't get much of an answer
from anywhere about how to take it on either.  I wasn't offered my own new
wiki-thread though, maybe I didn't ask the right person...

> No, it's not about perl6 vs. perl5. It's about the original Timeline by
> Elaine vs. a new timeline (for Perl, probably both 5 and 6
>
As you might realise, I'm reading between the lines a bit, and it's perhaps
not perl5/perl6, (that was a bit of a wide swipe), but it's the same people
and cliques we're talking about.
 
>
> That was not my intention, but may have seem like it.
>
I realise that you had not intended to make this much of an issue out it, or
to trample on another (if aged) project.  As I see it, it's happened that
way, because of choices people-in-power have made as to how to react to
someone who disagrees with them.  And particularly to those people who are
outside of the current magic-circle.
 
>
> We're not going to remove the old timeline. Also, I'd like to continue
> updating it, and hopefully Elaine will accept my modifications.
>
Sure, I can see what you mean, and that sounds very altruistic, to keep
Elaine's material 'on file' so to speak.  It's a highly defensible position,
on the face of it, but in reality, we all know what being quietly side-lined
means.

--
Richard Foley
Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen

http://www.rfi.net/

On Monday 28 April 2008, Richard Foley wrote:
> On Sunday 27 April 2008 21:43:35 Shlomi Fish wrote: 
>
> Excellent work.
>

Thanks.
 
>
> It's a real shame the perl6 people seem to be incapable of using the work
> from the perl5 people - or have I misread the thread?
>

No, it's not about perl6 vs. perl5. It's about the original Timeline by Elai
ne
vs. a new timeline (for Perl, probably both 5 and 6, though we'll have to se
e
how everything progresses). Both timelines cover Perl. The differences are:

1. The original timeline was a static HTML page, while the new timeline is
maintained as a wiki page.

2. The new timeline has a different licence. (Open-content, probably).

3. The new timeline is still much more incomplete and is in its infancy.

I'm planning on contributing to both timelines.

> I mean, Elaine sounds a bit pissed off, but I'm not really surprised when
> she gets her project whipped from under her feet.

That was not my intention, but may have seem like it.

> Never mind that it's not
> been updated for a while - surely we should respect her 'ownership' of tha
t
> corner and work to get co-editing facilities of it in some way, much like
> when Michael gave out commit bits for the Test::More code to a choice grou
p
> of interested individuals some time ago.  This kind of thing happens all
> the time, it's called co-operation.
>

Yes, my intention was to update the timeline myself, and send my modificatio
ns
upstream. I didn't raise the wiki was not my idea, though I admit it sounds
tempting.

> I don't see why we have to trash the old stuff, just because certain peopl
e
> have positions of power and can (ab-)use it to side-step the issue.

We're not going to remove the old timeline. Also, I'd like to continue
updating it, and hopefully Elaine will accept my modifications. Of course,
one problem with the old licencing terms is that it is not clear whether one
can fork the document into a new modified one while still preserving the
originator's ownership of the document. Maybe it's completely forbidden (i.e
:
if the document was CC-by-nc-nd for example.)

What we are planning to do is to continue maintaining the old timeline while
in the meanwhile working on a new one. This is similar to a software project
still maintaining its old version while starting a complete re-implementatio
n
or a much grander refactoring. E.g: perl5 vs. Perl 6 (Pugs/Rakudo/etc.), or
Bazzar "baz" which was a fork of Arch vs. Bazaar-NG "bzr" which was a
re-implementation. (or apache 2, etc.).

Regards,

Shlomi Fish

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shlomi Fish       http://www.shlomifish.org/
The Case for File Swapping - http://xrl.us/bjn7i

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 28 Apr, 2008, at 12:22, Richard Foley wrote:
> Well, I started to revise it myself once, but didn't get much of an
> answer
> from anywhere about how to take it on either.  I wasn't offered my
> own new
> wiki-thread though, maybe I didn't ask the right person...

What, did you have problems finding my email address, too? :)
 
> Sure, I can see what you mean, and that sounds very altruistic, to
> keep
> Elaine's material 'on file' so to speak.  It's a highly defensible
> position,
> on the face of it, but in reality, we all know what being quietly
> side-lined
> means.

History repeats itself time and time again. You get the people you
deserve by the silent majority remaining silent. Just like all the
politics inside Parrot. The silent remain silent and things continue
on just as they did in the days of P5P. For years many have
plaintively commented as to why there are so few women in perl,
especially when compared to other projects, and you need only look to
yourselves.

There were any number of more tactful methods to do what has been
done here, but the way of Perl is to get the knife and twist it hard
because feeling good about any contribution must not be allowed. And
the silent sit there and let it happen. Jarkko's thanks after 5 years
leading up to 5.8 was a lot of bitching about 'core bloat'.

The parting 'XXXX you' is the perl way.

e.

Elaine Ashton wrote:

> I'll welcome updates.
>
> I'll welcome fixed links and html.
>
> I'll welcome new content.
>

brian and chromatic have posted a few 'Year in Review' type nodes to
Perlmonks and oreillynet that would likely be helpful if someone were to
work on some updates. Here's the link to 2007, and it contains links to
2006 and 2005:

http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=659849

The 2007 version is extensive and if I recall correctly, a version was
published in The Perl Review as well.


--
Jim Brandt
The Perl Foundation
email: cbrandt@perlfoundation.org

2008/4/28 Jim Brandt <cbrandt@buffalo.edu>:
>
>  Elaine Ashton wrote:
>
> 
>
>  brian and chromatic have posted a few 'Year in Review' type nodes to
> Perlmonks and oreillynet that would likely be helpful if someone were to
> work on some updates. Here's the link to 2007, and it contains links to 20
06
> and 2005:
>
>  http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=659849
>
>  The 2007 version is extensive and if I recall correctly, a version was
> published in The Perl Review as well.

So Shlomi, Chris - have you emailed useful updates to elaine yet ?

A.

--
http://www.aarontrevena.co.uk
LAMP System Integration, Development and Hosting