zzbbyy at gmail.com
Fri Apr 25 12:04:37 BST 2008
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Nicholas Clark <nick at ccl4.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 12:54:58PM +0100, Paul Makepeace wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:13 PM, Paul Johnson <paul at pjcj.net> wrote:
> > > Tell us something exciting about how Google is using dynamic languages.
> > Funny you should ask! Well, Google thinks python is important enough
> > to hire its author, Guido v Rossum. And he's part of a team that's
> > been working on making python accessible in a hosted environment,
> > along with Django and friends. It's pretty damn cool.
> Whereas no company using Perl thinks that it is important enough to their
> business to hire any of the core developers to work on Perl to benefit their
> own business (and happily happen maybe to help others).
> Except, I think, at times, ActiveState, and they have trouble convincing
> anyone they approach to relocate to Vancouver.
> I think that this may be part of the problem with Perl. For over a decade
> none of the key Perl contributors have not been employed by any of the key
> large Perl using companies, so their has been no (significant) corporate
> patronage of Perl infrastructure and marketing.
> (sort-of exceptions being ActiveState, a small company, hosting the Perl 5
> perforce repository, and Fotango donating money to TPF (without formal
> thanks) and sponsoring Ponie, but I'd not count either company significant -
> Fotango was never more than 35 people, and I'm guessing ActiveState is no
> more than 50. Neither have the (market capitalisation) scale of Shopzilla or
> Ticketmaster or Yahoo!) (Or even firms with around 250 employees)
> (Sort of exception being Fotango employing me, but it wasn't formally to work
> on the Perl core as part of my job at any time. Working on Ponie came later,
> as a side effect of Arthur moving from development to operations, and there
> were at least 3 months when I was instructed not to work on Ponie, but wasn't
> in a position to say that to the world.)(Shopzilla (London) certainly did not
> employ me as anything other than a fungible "senior Perl developer", unlike
> their later employment of Tim Bunce to work on core infrastructure.)
> (And that's just me. None of Larry, Jarkko, Rafael, Dave, Yves or Abhijit
> to my knowledge have ever been employed by anyone in the last 10 years,
> because they were a core Perl developer.)
> All these corporate users of Perl are taking it for granted.
> Given that no large corporation has the altruistic balls to do anything, it's
> (mostly) why I'm trying to get a plan together for how to get money out of
> firms to pay for someone to deal with the grunge work of supporting Perl 5:
Perhaps instead of counting on company altruism we should think about
what benefits companies could get from supporting such a work schema?
One obvious thing is the popularity - the question is how effective
this can be in comparison with the traditional ways of sponsoring a
Perl event and displaying banners at it?
Another thing, I know this will be very controversial, but at least
accept it on the basis of brainstorming ideas, could be that a company
doint that could compile a big database of Perl contributors and then
use it for recruitment. Maybe there is a chance that this could be
done in a civilised way?
> but so far it's an overwhelming "meh" as far as feedback goes on whether my
> proposal would even work. (the "how to spend money" part)
> Why do I bother?
> I forgot I knew an answer to your previous question. Shopzilla were sold for
> over $500 million a couple of years back, and they would cease trading
> overnight without Perl, as it runs their website, and that is 100% of their
> I don't know how reliant Ticketmaster and Oversee.net are on Perl, or what
> their valuations are, but they advertise a lot for developers with Perl
> skills in the LA area.
Yeah - but still we should not count on their altruism - but rather we
need to find some real benefits that they would get from supporting
More information about the london.pm