shar 3.49 (part 2 of 2)

[Tom Neff]

In article <1990Sep15.104022.22648 at zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> xanthian at zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
>jfh at rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
>> rhg at cpsolv.CPS.COM (Richard H. Gumpertz) writes:
>>>Submitted-by: rhg at cpsolv
>>>Archive-name: shar3.49/part02
>>
>>I hate to pick on Warren Tucker, but isn't this getting a bit silly?
>>How many new versions of shar a week are you guys turning out?
>
>There is sufficient precedent, John.  Or have you forgotten the initial
>release of Perl, followed instantly by 26-some patches?
>
>It was along about patch 20 that I realized I would never, for love or
>money, write a line of Perl code, I was that angry at Larry's release
>methods.

Utter bullshit, he said dispassionately.  :-)

Perl represented MAJOR new functionality in an unheard-of package, with
maximum portability the goal and wide-open testing the modus operandi.
Larry released what he had and invited input.  The result was a series
of working patchlevels.  The patchlevel number (currently 28) is
artificially high because a number of major updates required patch
scripts bigger than a normal news article, so they were split into
constituent "patch sets."  The number of integral Perl changes is a lot
less than 28.  The result is GOLDEN, and Kent is living in an obsolete
universe if he's too stubborn to import it.

>Comparitively, shar 3.49 is a mild irritation.

ComparAtively, "shar 3.49" is a complete fucking waste of time and
net.resource from people with nothing better to do than reinvent the
wheel so they can etch their names on the hubcap.  In my not so humble
opinion.  ;-)
-- 
"Well! Is somebody a teensy bit low on self-esteem  ===== Tom Neff
  today?" -- Irwin                                  [|||] tneff at bfmny0.BFM.COM
"Shuddup. Go away. Scram. Get lost." -- Broom Hilda [|||] uunet!bfmny0!tneff