I posted this poll SPECIFICALLY to challenge the assertion that "Infopop listens to its users". If, as I suspect, the outcome of this poll is overwhelmingly in favor of "continue to support the Perl version", and Infopop DOESN'T support it, ... well, you'll know that "your opinion" doesn't count for jack-squat. Please vote!
Hmmmm... 2/3 of folks support continuing the Perl version. Interesting... wonder how that figure will grow as we go through the day. And I wonder if anyone in position to make decisions will notice... and then if they'll care.
> I think it's interesting to note that Infopop features wwwthreads installations that are currently in use, yet all of them are using the perl version!
Yes, I was wondering about this, too. In the overview I read about "[...] the advantage of the flexibility and power of the PHP language [...]" and at the bottom of the same page they present me a bunch of PERL forums. []/testimages/icons/smile.gif[/] I really appreciate this, but shouldn't they present powerful PHP forums rather than our weak PERL baby? []/testimages/icons/wink.gif[/]
I'm sure the reason they chose those sites were the Names themselves, not which version they are running... I sent rick an e-mail about this last night, so I am sure that it will be looked at...
Taking the optimistic side of things, in the long run, if those sites upgrade in the future, they'll pretty much have to become PHP users... []/testimages/icons/wink.gif[/] so, maybe those links are a form of foretelling....
It does look a little odd, though... same thing on the Features page... the Category Separation example currently points back to this site... to the Perl version! oops! I'm sure that one will get fixed pretty quickly, tho...
matt
Like I said before, you have to take this into consideration. Within the next couple of months I was going to have to make this decision anyways. I work about 10 hours a day at my day job and then spend another 5-7 here. It was getting to the point where I was making very little progress trying to maintain both versions and was on the verge of burnout because of it.
I know if I were to have made the decision on my own it still wouldn't have been a very popular decision but it was either make a change, go crazy, get divored or just quit[]/testimages/icons/crazy.gif[/]. I really needed to get to the point where I could spend my time more productively, make some progress and then have a little bit of time left over to do something else.
But you're comparing apples and oranges. I could expect that type of change "if this was just a hobby/night-job", but with the "funding and resources" infopop is allegedly bringing to the table, then this should, in theory, be your day job now, right? Or at least SOMEONE's day job. Given THAT, we can't really compare the two now, because the development process is being funded by completely different factors (free-time development versus paid-developer development).
Given that we're now in the LATTER category, I'd expect there should be ample resources to continue parallel development. If Infopop feels there is insufficient market for the Perl product (as the marketing hype tends to be calling Perl an "inferior" product-platform) then there have been (to your admission) multiple offers, my own included, to fork the perl codebase into a separate product. If Infopop's assertion that perl is "inferior" is true, they should have no problem with allowing some other person or group to create an inferior product. My offer remains open, and I'd like to hear from an Infopop person as to WHY such an offer is not accepted (if indeed, as I suspect, it will not be).
D
No, it's definitely not my day job. I love my day job and this has always been a part time thing. The Infopop staff will be doing the majority of the backend, but I am still the lead developer. Everyone was very concerned that the code would change, or the new developers would try to change it into UBB, or things like that. That is why I was able to reassure everyone that something like that wasn't going to happen.
And nobody from Infopop said it was inferior. I said that I will be able to do alot more things in PHP than I would be able to do in PERL. Yes, I know you can do almost anything in PERL but alot of requires extra modules. I went into the full explanation in quite a few posts already. Infopop made the decision that my time would be better spent focusing on one product instead of 2.
Everyone was very concerned that the code would change, or the new developers would try to change it into UBB, or things like that. That is why I was able to reassure everyone that something like that wasn't going to happen.
But isn't that partly what's happening? We're used to things the way they are and a significant user-base are being told to get stuffed because the Infopop folks can't be bothered to maintain the Perl version.
And nobody from Infopop said it was inferior. I said that I will be able to do alot more things in PHP than I would be able to do in PERL. Yes, I know you can do almost anything in PERL but alot of requires extra modules. I went into the full explanation in quite a few posts already. Infopop made the decision that my time would be better spent focusing on one product instead of 2.
... then they should have no problem with someone picking up the Perl ball and running with it on their own. Obviously they feel it isn't "worth their resources" to maintain it.
I could have sworn I saw a "side by side" comparison made recently as to "why" Perl was dropped. Even your statement itself implies some inferiority in the Perl platform "because it requires extra modules". I can't seem to find the note I was talking about now, though. (too many messages on this topic to find the particular nugget I'm looking for and I don't remember the wording enough to use the search. []/testimages/icons/wink.gif[/]
D
And nobody from Infopop said it was inferior.http://www.wwwthreads.com/perl/show...Limit=25&Old=allposts&Main=42358Furthermore, PHP is more scalable than basic Perl and is easier to install. - ted_oneill
Certainly sounds like he's saying PHP is superior to Perl, thus stating that Perl is inferior to PHP.
D
(knew I'd find it)
Yep, you found it[]/testimages/icons/laugh.gif[/]. The PHP version is definitely easier to install as you don't have the modules to worry about. And it holds its own against PERL running under mod_perl without the extra requirements.
Anywho, my personal feelings on it are that I love PERL. It's the language I learned in. Give tne choice in coding many applications I'd take PERL everytime. They asked me what I thought the better choice was to take this thing to the next level and I said PHP. Trust me, I never thought I'd say that but PHP for web apps truly is easier at least in my view. But, everyone has their preferences and I've seen plenty of battles of PHP sucks, PERL rules, vice-versa.
The problem is, of course, that a non-trivial number of paying users CAN'T (or, to a lesser extent, won't) switch to PHP, essentially leaving those loyal customers to go elsewhere. I'm half-tempted to start an open-source "reverse engineer" project, rewriting w3t from scratch, but talking to the existing 5.4.4 database so that perl users can continue to have a growing project (as opposed to the "bastard stepchild" that Infopop is promising, which anyone with software-development experience knows will finally be put down like an old dog in a year or so for "business reasons", and not even supported with regard to bug-fixes and security errors)
D
(still waiting for someone from Infopop to comment publicly on my request to fork the perl code)
I must apologize, for I fear I've helped provoke all of this. What is done is done, and we should continue to support w3t, if not, there's no use in crying over spilled milk, so to speak.
I'd LOVE to support w3t, except w3t has chosen NOT to support ME, its customer.
Trust me when I say that you may have been "The first" to voice discontent, but the discontent would still have been heard, and will continue to be heard, I think, until some better arrangement is arrived at.