gistfile1.txt

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:37:46AM +0000, Dave Cross <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Marc,
> 
> It seems that your blog post at
> 
>   http://blog.schmorp.de/2015-12-15-tidbits-cgipm-a-data-point.html
> 
> jumped to some some conclusions that aren't backed up by the facts.

Dave, I am only reporting about that site, and the only newer version of
perl that doesn't include CGI.pm by default is 5.22, no?

It's you who is jumping to conclusions, no?

And, as I already remarked, you get full extra points for ignoring actual
criticism and jumping at the messenger.

I am totally not surprised.

> You assume that the problems that Gamebase64.com is experiencing are because
> This is using Perl 5.8. I assume that means they're using Centos (or RHEL) 5.

I go by what the site actually reports, you go by assumptions. The
site might be wrong, and your assumption right, but the one jumping to
conclusions is you here.

> In fact I'd say there are three people at fault here:

No, the people at fault here and everywhere else is the p5pers which, for
years now, drive a hard course of breaking perl for the rest oif the world
because perl has cxhanged form a stable and usable language into their own
toy experimenting sandbox.

That's the core of my criticism, as you are well aware, and again, I am not
surprised that you ignore that.

> I wonder if you'll consider updating your blog post to include this
> information.

I did, but at the same time, it's sad to see that some people can't
even *understand* crticism when they see it. The problem is that perl5
officially broke with backwards compatibility and every new version breaks
dozens or hundreds of modules that were correct before, while at the same
time publicly criticising module authors for not following perl5porters
fast moving standards, as if they had to somehowe anticipate the breakage
by being clairvoyant.

Sigh. perl5 is dead, and you helped, not the least with censorship.

But thanks for your asshole "nonsense" comment which ignores the facts
(namely that I am just *reporting* what the website says). Did I expect
better? yes! am I surprised? I was, but in hindsight, I am not.