Re: [MacPerl] Mac/MacPerl users but not mac-specific (Vicki rantalert)

[Vicki Brown <vlb@cfcl.com>]

<x-flowed>At 15:40 -0500 2/2/99, Ronald J. Kimball wrote:

A bunch of things I _really_ wish he had said offline, because I 
didn't want this to stay on the list.  It's not MacPerl specific, 
it's not Mac related, it's not Perl related and it doesn't belong 
here.  But now that I seem to have to defend myself, oh, d#@!.  One 
last stab at explaining myself to people who don't grok what I'm 
saying.  Please do NOT reply to the list. This is the last I will 
say; if you still don't understand what I'm getting at, well, tough.

> There is a difference between a question which is non-MacPerl-specific and
> a question which isn't even related to MacPerl.

Yes. I think so too.  Not everyone here may agree with you, however.

> An example of the former would be: "How do I create a regex to match
> such-and-such?"

Yes...

> An example of the latter would be: "How do use fork() in Perl on a Unix
> server?"

It would be (however, no one has actually asked this question in 
recent memory.  What he asked was:

>  how to
>> >accomplish both the wwwboard process and the mail process in parallel.

It became a question of fork.  We don't have threads on the Mac 
anyway. And yes, he was on a Unix system. Even so...

> I would have no problem answering the first question on this list.  I
> believe I have answered such questions on this list.  Sure, the answer
> applies to Perl in general; but it's just as valid in MacPerl as in any
> other Perl, and that's what's important.

>From my viewpoint, given past discussions on this topic, a certain 
number of list members _would_ have a problem with the former 
question being asked (or answered) on this list. The fact that there 
is disagreement over what qualifies as a valid question for 
mac-perl@iis.ee.ethz.ch is why we undergo this entertaining little 
diversion periodically.

Apparently Ronald is one of the folks "on the fence".  I can dig out 
and quote the people who want all non-Mac-specific questions (such as 
"how do I create this regex") off the current list. (They want web 
related questions off too; that's what the long-awaited mac-perl-www 
is for). I can also quote people who feel they have been told to take 
their questions elsewhere and don't, honestly, feel they have 
anywhere else to go.

Let me ask you all this - if everyone is so much in agreement on the 
charter of the current list, then how come every time this topic 
comes up I get mail from folks who say "yes! Sign me up!".  Hmm?

> The second question, however...  Why should I answer a question on 
> the MacPerl
> list that specifically *excludes* MacPerl from the answer?

When and where did I, or anyone, suggest excluding MacPerl from the 
answer to any question? You misrepresent me, sir.  Do you mean 
because the script in question uses fork?  The number of calls that 
Perl has that _cannot_ run on a Mac is very small.  The number of 
questions about those would, I think, be fairly small as well.

Questions about system()?  They apply to MacPerl.  Sockets apply. 
Most of the networking stuff applies.  `command` applies.  A great 
deal of Perl applies.

> What would be
> the point of having a MacPerl list if we answered Unix questions all the
> time?

Did I advocate answering Unix questions all the time?  Did anyone?

I'll answer the first half of the question.  The point of a MacPerl 
list is for questions from people who use Perl and use a Mac and use 
Perl on their Mac (MacPerl).  And sometimes, they have questions 
about Perl (not specifically MacPerl). And sometimes, this being the 
real world, they are in a heterogenous environment and their question 
sneaks over the border to something that smells of Unix.  And they 
want to ask other people they know and respect and have a common 
background with.  People who might know the answer.

The first people you ask are your friends and the people you know.

> I thought that's what this list was.  Mostly about Perl, not
> necessarily on the Mac, but not about Perl specifically not on the Mac.

I would like it to be that.  I don't think it is.

Even if it were, I am not personally of the opinion that we should 
disallow the occasional "Perl specifically not on the Mac" question 
when properly labeled as such.  When it comes from a list member who 
is a Mac / MacPerl / Perl user, who in a given situation is running 
into trouble with a port to a 'foreign" operating system?  Why send 
our comrade out into the jungle of comp.lang.perl.misc?  What purpose 
does that serve?  I merely propose an alternative.  I would prefer 
that all members questions be welcome... _here_.

> Who determines what is "occasional"?

why, the listmom of course :-)

>What will you do if it "takes over"?

Politely suggest that it stop ;-)  It seems to work for Matthias. 
It's worth a try.  Most of the folks on this list are polite, 
well-meaning and well-behaved.  Even if some of us occasionally 
misunderstand what others of us are trying to say :-(

>
> Why are you omitting people who don't have Macs?

Because the point here is not to duplicate comp.lang.perl.misc in 
mailing list form.  If someone wants to do that, they're welcome to 
it. (I might join if they didn't duplicate _everything_ about c.l.p.m 
:-)

The point here is to generate a companion list to the current macperl 
list whereon no one will fear hearing
    "I'm sorry.  That's not a MacPerl-specific topic.
     Please take it to some other forum".

This list would be that other forum.   :-)

mac-perl-offtopic?  :-)

> They're not allowed to
> talk mostly about Perl, not specifically Perl on the Mac, just, Perl?

I'm not sure what you're saying here.  I'm really not sure what you 
think _I'm_ saying here.

> But even if you're hosting the script on a Unix machine, you can't ask the
> question unless you own a Mac.

To reiterate: This (new proposed) list would be a companion list for 
the macperl list _except_ it will not have the (in my opinion 
misguided and certainly widely misunderstood) restriction that all 
posts must be MacPerl specific. End of description.

Not everyone thinks the current list has a MacPerl-specificity 
restriction.  Not everyone seems to agree on the parameters of that 
restriction. However, we have never quite made it to the point where 
we all agree that the current list DOES NOT have that restriction.

>
> That seems even more arbitrary than what you're complaining about.

I could say "it's my list".  Instead I will say:
     That's only because you are misunderstanding my motivations.

>> Specifically MacPerl questions should stay here on mac-perl@iis.ee.ethz.ch.
>> Specifically Mac toolbox or Mac CGI questions should go to the new
>> MacPerl lists which are starting r.s.n. (Yoohoo?  Jeff?).
>
> Apparently specifically Unix questions can go to those lists too; they're
> much better lists than this one.

Um, as those lists aren't publicly available yet (I've been 
subscribed to them since they were turned on and there is no traffic 
:-) how do you know what sorts of questions can/can't be posted?

> Not MacPerl specific.  Just not MacPerl-excluded.

Not MacPerl specific.  Definitely no MacPerl-excluded.  We use Macs. 
We use Perl.

At 20:53 +0100 2/2/99, Matthias Neeracher wrote:
> It has certainly become apparent in earlier round of this discussion that
> people like the coziness of a mailing list for discussing perl questions, so
> I'm sure this list will fill a useful niche. However, it's not 
> clear to me why
> you want to hold *people* to some platform criterium if you don't 
> do that with
> their *questions*. Why not open the list to all perl users, i.e., make the
> criteria that they a) want to talk about Perl and b) will not stop 
> anybody else
> from talking about Perl?

Because, as I said, I don't want to recreate comp.lang.perl.misc in 
list format.   I don't even want to create a new list but I fear we 
will never get a large enough proportion of the folks on the current 
list to agree that Plain Old Perl questions are really acceptable 
here.

If somebody else wants to start an "Any Perl User is Welcome 
Regardless of Platform, even if it's Windoze" mailing list, I can 
send you the URL for Majordomo :-)  I might even join.

In my view, stated many times before: We use Perl.  We use Macs.  We 
don't want to be told to go fend for ourselves on 
comp.lang.perl.misc.  If we use both, we belong on a macperl list.

I'd prefer it to be this one.  I'm willing to start a second.

I'm also in favor of portable solutions; why write something that can 
_only_ run on Unix, or the Mac, if you don't have to?  On 
comp.lang.perl.misc you'd hear  "Just use fork()" or "Call 
system('sort...')".  On macperl, maybe someone will get "better" 
advice (or at least more creative), hmm?  For example, the question 
that started this all wasn't about fork(); it was about how to solve 
a particular problem.  As Chris asked "Do you really need two 
processes"?  Is that a Unix-only answer?

If a question/answer pair isn't going to be universally applicable to 
a representative sampling of list members, take the _answer_ offline. 
But the questioner is one of us; why not let him ask the question. 
Maybe he's misguided.  Maybe you'll learn something.


Stepping down from the soapbox... walking away... not gonna read 
anymore mailing lists today...
The speaker will not entertain questions from the floor.
Marking further messages on this topic as read...
If you want to reach me, you have my email address...

Rebuttals, reprisals, discussions, expressions of fervent agreement 
and flames OFFLINE please!

- Vicki
---
      |\      _,,,---,,_   Vicki Brown <vlb@cfcl.com> www.cfcl.com/~vlb
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   Journeyman Sourceror: Scripts & Philtres
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'  P.O. Box 1269  San Bruno  CA  94066
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)  Ooit'n Normaal Mens Ontmoet? En... Beviel't?
                      Ever met a normal person? So... did you like it?

***** Want to unsubscribe from this list?
***** Send mail with body "unsubscribe" to mac-perl-request@iis.ee.ethz.ch


</x-flowed>