> We started off with an intense RFC process. This produced many good > ideas, not-so-good ideas, and ideas with potential but desperately > needing polish. If you'd like a recap, you might try MJD's article > on the subject (http://www.perl.com/lpt/a/2000/11/perl6rfc.html). > One of the major things that was lacking from the RFC process was > focus. The advantage of community contribution is that it brings > out good ideas from many different perspectives. The disadvantage > is that the ideas form no coherent whole. Larry was the obvious > choice to provide the needed focus.
The fact that the RFC process did not well as we all expected doesn't mean that the community has to remain silent for two years, or that the only authorized way to express should be perl6-language. Coding is not the only useful thing we can do while we wait for the design to finish. While Apocalypses are great to show (and justify) the changes, they are no substitute for the a language reference, or for user-oriented documentation. So, while we all wait for Larry to wait the design, is there any reason not to start working in the documentation? This would serve for: - Consolidating Perl5 documentation + Perl6 Apocalypses/Exegesis/.. and merging it all into a single reference. - Finish the details that may be not complete in the Apocalypses (there are plenty of them) - Create tentative references for "boring" things, that may be revised/updated with Larry's coments. We can avoid the RFC nightmare by: - Working in a structured way: for example replicating the structure of perl5 documentation. - Working _independently_ of Larry. There is no need for Larry to spend time reading or fixing the documentation generated by the Documentation Group. Discussion could be done in a separate list (perl6-documentation?) and it would be the Documentation Group's responsability to update the documentation whenever an Apocalypses invalidates it. It's like this: Larry writes the Apocalypses, Damian the Exegesis, and the community writes the Cathecism (a codified, detallied and anonymous explanation of the most boring details of the faith, written in a form that plain people can understand). -angel
