IMHO, this isn't a matter of either-or, but of concurrent development along
2 related tracks:
You're right, it doesn't have to be either-or.
[snip]
It would be good to have (1) ASAP.
There's no reason that people who are interested in (2) have to be
interested in (1) or vice versa.
I agree
> From: Amir E. Aharoni [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> 2006/8/3, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I'll be honest, I was willing to put in some effort for something
> > substantial and original, but I'm not too keen on just remaking or
> > porting an old solution.
Please see my response below.
>
2006/8/3, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'll be honest, I was willing to put in some effort for something
substantial and original, but I'm not too keen on just remaking or
porting an old solution.
M.T.
Just in case i am misunderstood - i'm not talking about the platform,
i'm talking about co
I'll be honest, I was willing to put in some effort for something
substantial and original, but I'm not too keen on just remaking or
porting an old solution.
M.T.
> From: Amir E. Aharoni
>
> There was so much talk about perl6 wiki, that i couldn't follow
> it anymore.
>
> Is there a currently working wiki where actual perl6 documentation can
> be read/written?
Not that I know of, at least not in the sense of being a widely-accepted and
presently-active foc
