To be honest, I haven't seen any Perl 6 replies to questions asked on Perl 5, so I'm not sure where you get the "division" from.

I think the past has shown that things happening in Perl 6 land also tend to influence decisions that apply to Perl 5, in the sense that Perl 5 usually adapts the things seen as beneficial for its own purposes. So I'm not convinced that announcements of teachings about Perl 6 are to be banned here, either.

I decided to join PM this week as I keep coming back here for various questions. Same thing for me, I cannot recall a thread where a Perl6 solution was presented to a problem that confused me. I might have ignored it though since Perl6 has not been that interesting to me.

I did that today in node 1155267 of topic socket checker in multiple hosts for multiple destination so I'm guilty as charged (and got downvoted to boot). I think I want to see a split to a separate Perl 6 monastery because I can't seem to help my bent toward Perl 6 advocacy.

I mean the division in purpose, in functionality, of this website (which is a sort of microcosm of the same thing happening in the broader Perl world). Mostly talking about the domination of the "Perl News" [sic] category here (as well as, off-site, for example, blogs.perl.org, the TPF presence at FOSDEM that I pointed out, the Perl Weekly content, the content of talks at the YAPCs, etc.).

If I were a newb and I consulted the "Perl News" section (or any of the entry points to the Perl world listed above) I might easily conclude that "Perl 6" is where it is at, among the PerlMonks, anyway.

(Edit: I do note, however, that http://perlnews.org, linked from the http://perl.org front page, has not been updated since April 16, 2015 ... perhaps the barriers to publication there are higher?)

I can see the motivation to conflate "Perl 6" with Perl on the part of the hobbyists, who would like to get more people involved in their thing. But for a monastery that exists to provide opportunities to teach and learn Perl, I see no benefit to such conflation. Rather I see an obligation to deobfuscate the issue, and provide clarity for novice and experienced monks who come here expecting to read about Perl.

"News" articles recounting someone's adventures in learning or hacking Ruby or Go or Node.js are not considered appropriate for publishing on this site. Despite "Perl 6"'s historical roots in Perl, it is one of that group (other languages), not Perl, and I don't think it's any more appropriate here than they are.

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Liking—or taking an interest in—both is actually the opposite of divisive.

Also, dinosaurs rule and it’s JS that is likely to toss the final shovels of dirt, not Perl6.

++, especially for "dinosaurs rule".

Dinosaurs don't rule. They're extinct.

The impression that Perl used to rule, and is now extinct, is exactly the impression we have to counter out in the working world. To have The Perl Foundation distributing t-shirts with a dinosaur for Perl and a butterfly for "Perl 6" just makes it looks like there's a real agenda at play there.

Erratum: As I said, "makes it look..." Further digging has revealed that the dinosaur logo was created in 2011 and its creator intended in part to counter the perception that Perl was nearing extinction. A misguided theory in my view, but one that is not new, as I thought, and alleged.

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Yes, but, can we really shrug this off easily just like that? This could be pretty serious, I mean, if the Perl 6 commies are trying to poison our well? Do we not have a duty to our Monastery, to uphold, to maintain, to protect the Purity Of Essence?

:P https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY&t=1m9s

I understand your frustration, and in some ways I agree. However, I woke up this morning, and I think there were only three questions that were less than 24 hours old. If we stay status-quo and become stagnant, we risk ending up like Myspace or similar. Perl isn't dying, but it's definitely being overtaken.

Personally, I went down a P6 ride because of expert P5 programmers work on P6 I spotted in their PM sigs (moritz for one) years ago. Now that's not a valid reason, but honoring those folk who may have moved away from PM because of a perceived lack of support is.

My desire is to keep PM my primary source for learning about, and sharing my knowledge of all things Perl... if necessary, from v1.0 through vx.x. We always have the option to consider an edit to add a "Perl6: " type prefix to a post if one feels it necessary.

Well said!

Well, and now¹, TIMTOP. Even if you were not consciously aware of the fact, but "more than one way" already could include the choice of the programming language. I see this as one reason why you can find also sound answers about non-Perl-languages here in the monastery.

As a long-time Perl user and now a Perl 6 advocate, part of me agrees with you, and part does not. I certainly have seen lots of snide comments about Perl 6 here, but my impression is that most old Perl monks live and let live. Maybe the split or not split should be the subject of the next poll!

For people trying to learn Perl6, looking for information here would be an impossible task. Any search would bring back a sea of information about irrelevant Perl5 solutions.

IMO, the reason why Perl6 has to go to a different monastery is because it deserves it

I think there's merit in that POV, though I'd put it a little differently:

IMO, the reason why Perl6 should go to a different monastery is because that's what any self-respecting Perl6 devotee would insist upon.
(I haven't yet determined what, if anything, I think Perl6 "deserves" :-)

This is historically (and actually) a Perl5 website, and anyone who makes a post re Perl6 without signifying that it's related to Perl6 would also be showing disrespect to this forum.
But I've no objection to Perl6 (or other OT posts) being made here as long as they are marked appropriately in the subject line.
There's frequently something of interest to be found in such posts.

The shit will *really* hit the fan when flames about "Perl5 posts are no longer acceptable" start appearing here ;-)

Cheers,
Rob

I told you elsewhere, and tell you again (and you already know, I just want this reply to be here on record): TPF did not do that funding. That money came from lizmat and me. We gave money to TPF and EPO and Mark Keating to enable them to do this promotion. I am that person who has been ordering stickers and buttons and tuits and more. And not just Perl 6, also Perl 5. Actually, looking at number of different items, more Perl 5 than Perl 6. and apparently even the Perl Foundation spends its money on promoting "Perl 6" at conferences.

The thing that you explicitly mention, http://blogs.perl.org/users/shadowcat_mdk/assets_c/2016/02/20160130_085351-thumb-500x281-2297.jpg , well, that is a banner with the Camelia butterfly logo that was ordered and paid for by lizmat and me. It was at FOSDEM, and lizmat and I rented a van and filled it with a lot of Perl-swag (including a lot of Perl 5 stuff, such as Perl 5 books), and we transported the banner there ourselves.

If nothing else, segregate the Perl 6 stuff under it's own top level tab.

James

If nothing else, segregate the Perl 6 stuff under it's own top level tab.

Hi,

I'm sure we'll see one of those in two weeks ;)


Perl 6 section?
A proposal: new section on Perl Monks.
suggestion perl6 section in perlmonks
Proposal for a Perl 6 section?
2006 I think there should be a new Section on PerlMonks for Jobs/Modules/Quizzes/Perl6/Newbies/OffTopic/etc.
2003 perl6 section on PM
2002 Perl 6 section?
2002 Future of Perl, Future of the Monastery

Sometimes, if people keep on asking for something, they have a point.

A separate section on PerlMonks would not do though. GET YOUR OWN NAME!

Jenda
Enoch was right!
Enjoy the last years of Rome.

Separate but equal, eh? I like the cut of your jib!

I wouldn't ban Perl6; but then I'd be a whole heck've a lot freer about what constitutes an on topic discussion here.

We don't want people posting recipes, or links to cat vids or product promos; but there is much that is indirectly related to Perl, and programmers using Perl for all or part of work that it seems would be a) helpful to many; b) interesting to many; c) instructive to many; d) useful in keeping this place alive.

I will register my dismay & frustration, even anger, at the deliberate dead-ending of the Perl 5 line. But that boat sunk 13 years ago :(

Hi Arunbear,

We could also open up our Monastery to discussion about the Kardashians, if all we want is to increase traffic.

There are many reasons that contribute to the decline in participation on a venerable site like PerlMonks. I manage another site (sailing-related), that, like PerlMonks, was way ahead of its time and, in the early 2000s, grabbed a huge share of people interested in the site's theme. Like PerlMonks, it had superlative content and functioned exceptionally well. For many years it was *the* go-to site for the topic.

Now, like PerlMonks, the numbers are trending down, down. The most important reasons have to do with (a) the rest of the internet catching up, and (b) changing demographics, more than with anything else. The quality of the archived information, and of the answers to new questions, has not declined at all. But unlike in 2001, there are now multiple sites offering the same information, and some of them even function better. So now we are no longer the go-to site, but one among many, and in some ways, a little dated. And the cadre of sailors/monks has aged, some moving on, and has not been replaced with an equal number of younger members.

So, yes, we could dilute and even abandon the mission of the Monastery, in order to get more traffic. But another approach would be to try to address the causes for the decline, to the degree possible. One way to do this could be updating the look and feel of the site, so that a potential new user, most likely a "millenial", in the 15 seconds s/he considers the site, quite possibly on a mobile device, is enticed to hang around, rather than feeling like s/he accidentally stumbled into the Wayback Machine.

And if the decline continues, well, so be it. I for one would rather have this Monastery decline in traffic but maintain its quality and value as a source of learning about Perl, than to increase numbers at the cost of hosting a bunch of crufty content, that might be related to Perl on some spectrum of relativity, but is not actually about Perl.

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

Maybe we should seek the thoughts of the head monk of both Perls.

His thoughts when he gave birth to Perl and the Perl community?

From the 2nd "State of the Onion" (Monterey, 1998):

"Now the thing about the onion is that it teaches me something about my own importance. Or lack thereof. Namely, that while I may have started all this, I'm still a little bit of the onion. Most of the mass is in the outer layers. (That's why I like to see grassroots movements like the Perl Mongers springing up.) But here I sit in the middle. I get a bit of honor for my historical significance, and you sit here patiently listening to me talk about the oddest things, but in actual fact, most people see the outside of the onion, not the inside. Unless they make onion rings. But even then, the bigger rings have more to them than the smaller rings. Let that be a lesson to those of you who wish to be "inner ringers". That's not where the real power is. Not in this movement, anyway."

Link: http://www.wall.org/~larry/onion/onion.html

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

I tried yesterday to buy the domain "perl6monks.org" but, unsurprisingly, it's already been taken.

Wow, I tried it in my browser, but got redirected to Google search for

site:perlmonks.org ("perl 6" OR perl6) -intitle:Re
[download]

($q=q:Sq=~/;[c](.)(.)/;chr(-||-|5+lengthSq)`"S|oS2"`map{chr |+ord
}map{substrSq`S_+|`|}3E|-|`7**2-3:)=~y+S|`+$1,++print+eval$q,q,a,
[download]

A whois search shows it as a private registration. With the redirect I assume it is owned by the owner of perlmonks.org (Perl Foundation), but that's just a guess.

Hmm. Perhaps you'll have to use a different name.

The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

> open this as an official poll

With which consequence?

In the end it's the decision of the crowd who keeps PM up and running.

My contribution here was minor yet, but personally I would stop if 6 (or other technologies) got banned!°

The admins here are neither elected nor payed by a democratic po(ll)pulace, they do it for fun.

Careful when damaging the foundations of that building.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
Je suis Charlie!}

update

°) if I was into "there is only one way to do it" I would already be singing in the python choir.

Thank you for the suggestion, stevieb, but I'm not sure a poll would be any more useful than this thread, or any more useful than a poll about whether @lwall should change the name of "Perl 6" to something else. In neither case are we dealing with a democracy, and in this case, the gods know what has been said.

Personally, I think that this thread has unsurprisingly strayed, as would a poll, from the strict question of whether "Perl 6" should be housed elsewhere than this monastery, and reflects people's broader feelings about it, or its name at least. Anyway, however one wants to interpret the discussion, I will share, fwiw, that my OP has received the following votes as of this time:

upvotes:   25
downvotes: 21
[download]

Pretty even, and when you take into account the many monks who have viewed the thread and abstained from voting, pretty inconclusive :-|
The way forward always starts with a minimal test.

This reminds me of C vs. C++, which I have to say: I don't think C++ would have gotten traction without its C capability.

Similarly for Perl 5 and Perl 6--if Larry had named the latter something besides Perl I don't think it would have gotten traction.

if Larry had named the latter something besides Perl I don't think it would have gotten traction.

• There was no predecessor to Go, but it has traction.
• There was no predecessor to Dart, but it has traction.
• Swift " " " ...
• Rust " " " ...

Plus, there are innumerable ways that the Perl association could have been retained without closing off the door to Perl5's future.

---

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". I knew I was on the right track :)

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Similarly for Perl 5 and Perl 6--if Larry had named the latter something besides Perl I don't think it would have gotten traction.

the mustache provided all the traction necessary, and given the timeline very little traction was required

His stubborn insistence that his new language is just the latest version of the old one has done for Perl. Not just Perl 5 but Perl in all its forms is done for.

Condemned, by the deliberate and malicious-aforethought, to a slow, inexorable decline into the niche of languages kept alive by those old enough to remember how to use them.

Perhaps the saddest thing in life is living to witness the genius of youth become the twisted bitterness of old age.

In 1994, Perl 5 ripped up Perl 4.

In 1997, Perl 6 was announced. At the time, I was excited. (But then, I was still just a youngster.)

Almost 19 years later (and about 22 years after Perl 5.0.0), Perl 6 was released.

Since then, Perl 5 has become far far more deeply established than Perl 4 (or 3, 2, or 1). There's a lot more history to rip apart.

Perhaps Perl 6 should have been called something else, but like it's predecessor, it always was intended to replace it's predecessor. Maybe if Perl 6 development had taken only the few years Larry had thought it would take, things would have been less contentious.

From Perl 5's perspective, it would have been better to not reserve version 6, as Perl 5 has been burdened by still being version 5.x, so has the appearance of being very outdated.

Even what is now Perl 6 would have benefited from not reserving 6. It's been over 28 years since Perl 1 was released. Meanwhile, in 12 years, Fire Fox is at 44, and Chrome is at 47 after only 6 years.

Perhaps if, after the 5 (or even 10) year mark, Perl 6 had been renamed Perl++ or Perl-NG (or similar variant), the taint of obsolescence could have been shaken off by both projects.

Both are worthy languages. I hope both will have at least a decent life.

Good Programmers (like all of us here, right? ;-) know this rule of thumb: You don't tie a feature to a product version number during development! Too many places where I've worked, where the project lead wasn't really a Good Programmer, they used a branching scheme which declared that we shall branch for each release at the beginning of development for that release. That's fine when a "release" is one or two sprints long; but longer than that, and you inevitably run into this same situation: Feature X was supposed to go into Release V, but now we have to slip it to Release W... and now our branch is all whacked up.

For @larry to think that "main-line perl development can't possibly go so far as to need a new major version number before this new successor language is ready for release" reminds me an awful lot of the folly of "No one will ever need more than 640k" and such like as.

I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.