"Perl" in the name "Perl 6" is confusing and irritating

[lizmat]

Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl. It took way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued developing Perl 5.

Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.

Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of PerlCon 2019 in Riga, that the two sister languages are now old and wise enough to take care of themselves, such a name change would no longer require the approval of the BDFL.

[lizmat]

I would therefore propose to change the name to "the Camelia Programming Language" or "Camelia" for short, for several reasons:

• the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to the right place. This means that changing the name to "Camelia" will have minimal impact on findability on search engines such as Google and DuckDuckGo.

• the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also becomes the actual name of the programming language.

• "Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.

• The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in "roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to indicate an implementation, and would endanger the separation between specification and implementation.

• Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my preference for a known name such as "Camelia".

• The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that he helped get into the world.

EDIT: Damian Conway had persuasive reasons to use "Raku" instead of "Camelia". My proposal is therefore changed to use the name Raku instead.

[AlexDaniel]

Because we don't have this type of tickets very often, here's a reminder of how it goes for solutions that require consensus, specifically for this ticket:

• Changing the language name is a change to the language, so @jnthn will be directing the progress on this ticket.
• Once a particular solution is chosen (e.g. Camelia), it'd need to be submitted as a pull request (once jnthn decides that the particular solution is worth trying). The pull request should at the very least tweak “Perl” mentions in the README.md, other requirements (if any) will be specified by jnthn.
• Usually, more proposals are welcome right from the start, but I think in this case we should refrain from spamming more suggestions (something other than “Camelia”) unless jnthn really wants to look for a different name.
• Everyone in this list will need to approve the change, and the idea is that as grown ups we should eventually get to the same decision through civil discussion. If you're not in that list but you're involved in this project and the change affects you significantly, you should submit a PR adding yourself.
• This ticket will likely get a lot of comments, so please try to keep them small and on point.

Edit1: clarified that the PR is only needed later once jnthn is OK with the change
Edit2: recommend people to be short and on point

[nxadm]

I agree wholeheartedly with @lizmat. The name Perl 6 dates from a time when the project had a completely different scope and timetable. Today, people outside the Perl echo chamber can't differentiate between Perl 5 and Perl 6, besides making the wrong --but obvious-- assumption the former is the old version and the latter the new one. Perl 6 is a new language with a smaller community and ecosystem compared to Perl 5, and like every new language needs to find its own way to a wider usage. This needs to be acknowledged: there is only so far you can go on the shoulder of the older language.

On one hand, Perl 5 is damaged by the startup status op Perl 6, not only because of the squatting of the next major number, but also because the new language can't yet deliver on what people expect from a top 10 language. Why would they give Perl 5 a chance when the latest version has a very small ecosystem and not a lot of jobs available yet? On the other hand, there is no denying that the popularity of Perl 5 is decreasing. Why would you try this hip new language when the main implementation is loosing mindshare?

@lizmat bets of the success of both languages, and who know, maybe it can be still one meta-community.

[genehack]

The video from Larry referenced by Liz in the ticket description can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2e0xSOHd-0

[nige123]

Here are some criteria for a good language name:

• distinctive
• shortish (< 6 characters)
• good Google find-ability
• command-line type-ability
• easy to read
• straightforward to pronounce
• easy to spell
• avoid hardwiring version numbers into the name (e.g., red6)
• not cause confusion
• not used by other major software projects / companies
• not trademarked already (in international classes: 9, 16, 41, 42)

"Camelia" ticks many of these boxes, although I prefer something shorter to type at the command-line. I wonder if we can come up with something shorter?

shell> camelia hello.cml
shell> cml hello.ca
shell> cm hello.cma
shell> ca hello.ca

"raku" and "ofun" were two names that ticked all the boxes above.

[RaycatWhoDat]

I don't have much of a horse in this race - in fact, this is my first comment - but, regarding the previous comment, camelia doesn't necessarily need to be the name of the command-line tool. In D, they use either dmd/gdc/ldc or dub. Maybe the same concept could apply here?

[vrurg]

Perhaps Camelia must not be a command line tool. Perhaps it has to be:

$ rakudo -v 
This is Rakudo version 2019.07.1-126-g90ffa349c built on MoarVM version 2019.07.1-72-g352ae27e4
implementing Camelia 6.d.

Anyway, renaming would result in so many different sorts of problems ranging in severity from "nah, nothing to worry about" to "oh, f*!" that compiler's name could simply be ignored as irrelevant.

As to the name itself. I personally don't care about it as I care more about the language itself. Yet, Camelia I like more than any other proposal so far. Actually, I just like it.

[nxadm]

@vrurg That is pretty much what rakudo-pkg does for Linux packages (link "perl6" to "rakudo" and "raku"):

https://github.com/nxadm/rakudo-pkg/blob/master/docker/pkg_rakudo.pl#L64

[ajs]

Here are some pros and cons that I don't see discussed above:

• "Perl 6" as a name has been around just shy of 20 years. It has a lot of history both inside and outside of the Perl community. There are documents like the one I just published today (Your Regex Here that aren't within the scope of anything this proposal will change, leading to potential confusion for years to come.
• Given the above timeline, imagine the proposal in the mid-2000s to change the name of perl (then Perl version 5) to LarryLang. The fact that that's a terrible name would not be in my top 10 reasons to dismiss the suggestion.
• But on the positive, a name change means, in some sense, a clean break with the history. There's a sense that Perl 6 is "never done" and when it is done it seems wise to draw that line in the sand.
• On the other hand, is it done? There's a pretty high signal boost in a name change, and if that signal-boosts "not done yet" then that's what this name will mean in the public consciousness forever.
• It does start with "C", and I personally like the call-back to C in our ancestry.
• I never saw a good analysis of why "Raku" seemed to fall so flat on the broader community.

[wbraswell]

I have already been promoting "Perl 6 AKA Raku", and I will be quite happy to promote "Perl 6 AKA Camelia" in the future, if this proposal is accepted. I will even be willing to drop the "Perl 6" eventually and just talk about "Camelia" as a language.

For the record, I like both names "Raku" and "Camelia", although I tend to agree with most everything @lizmat says (in general), so if she thinks "Camelia" is better then I will support this proposal 100%.

[lindleyw]

The right proposal at the right time.

[tadzik]

Frankly, I don't think I agree.

The reality is confusing (and irritating) as you say – no doubt about that. In hindsight, it was probably a mistake to name Perl 6 “Perl 6”, or maybe it was a mistake to not actually replace Perl 5 in a reasonable timeframe. However, I think the damage is done and the ship has sailed. I think the confusion may be with us forever, and I really don't think that a name change is going to do anything about it.

I don't see how Perl 5 is going to benefit from this. We're freeing the name, yes. They're free to reuse the versions now in however way they like, yes. Are they going to name the successor to 5.30 “Perl 6”? Of course not – that would cause more confusion, make them look stupid and make whatever spiritual successor of Perl 6 we could think of look obsolete. Would they go up to Perl 7 with the next major change? Perhaps, but they can do that anyway: they're another grown-up language that can make its own decisions :)

I'm not convinced it would do anything to improve Perl 6's image either. Being Perl 6 is “standing on the shoulders of giants”. Perl is a strong brand. Many people have left it because of the version confusion, yes. But I don't imagine these people coming back to check out some new Camelia language that came out. They might however decide to give Perl 6 a shot if they start seeing some news about it – “oh, I was using Perl 15 years ago... is this still a thing? Is that new famous version finally being out and useful? I should check it out!”

Additionally, I think that aside from the potential benefits of the change we should consider the potential damage. Once the word gets out that “Perl 6 is no longer being developed”, do you think that this will do Perl 5 any good? The fact that their supposed replacement was “finally abandoned”? Then also, people who decide to check out Camelia years from now, aren't they going to think “oh, wait, that's that Perl 6 thing that was actually dropped” – or maybe “oh, that looks like some sort of a weird spin of this Perl 7 that came out recently”.

Especially considering the potential damage to both our languages and communities, I think at the very least the Perl 5 community should be consulted on this. I know some of them have previously expressed joy at the idea of “the freeing of the name”, often for dubious reasons, but I think the issue is bigger than just us and it's fair to consider the opinion of at least the Perl 5 pumpking – and ideally also the Perl 5 loosely defined “cabal” :)

Now, I get that this issue is brought up whenever a question or a myth or a problem of the popularity of Perl, 5 or 6, is brought up – and for an understandable reason. The name confusion is a marketing and a visibility problem. But is it really the problem? Isn't the renaming idea a micro-optimization of the image of Perl?

C and C++ don't seem to be bothered by it too much. Neither do C and D. Or C++ and C# (the latter of which I like to read as C-plus-plus-plus-plus ;)). Nobody doubts that C++ is alive, that C is still a thing etc. Nobody really considers either of them dead. And the reason for that, I think, is that both of them are very much visible in the programming world, and not just in their own bubbles (except for D, perhaps). There's still people who get confused at the idea of C and C++ – or Java and JavaScript – but those are not actual programmers who are interested in this thing. Nobody who follows the programming community (and the “market”) in any way would ever confuse any pair of these. I think that's because all of these languages have a strong enough presence that any name problem of theirs is not really a problem at all.

I feel like the name debate gets brought up – by both sides – as a scapegoat of bigger issues. The reason why Perl 5 is considered dead is because the overwhelming majority of those considerers haven't seen Perl 5 being used in the last 10 years – and probably haven't seen a Perl 5 programmer either. Same goes for Perl 6 – it's hard to argue that Perl 6 is finished and ready when a single hand is more than enough to count the real-world uses of it. These issues will not go away with the rename. Perl, the old Perl 5, will still need to prove itself as the “still alive and better than ever”. Camelia, the old Perl 6, will still need to prove that it's a relevant language in a saturated programming market – and this time without the existing brand recognition and legacy that it has. A new name is not a killer app.

I think the renaming would do more harm than good. I'm not convinced that it will by itself change anything in the public image – whoever cares about Perl already knows the difference, and whoever does not care will not even bother to read the renaming announcements. If the Perl family of languages are to make – and enlarge – their impact on the world it has to be done with code, not words – semantics, not syntax, if you pardon the awful pun.

In any case, if Perl 6 is indeed to be renamed, I'd rather if it took a side turn rather than teleporting completely elsewhere. A name like “Perlsix” would still, imho, pass all the tests in our naming test suite, while it would also show pride of our legacy rather than running away from it. The world and the market of programming languages is crowded and cruel. I think we stand a better chance as a two-headed monster than by marking one of us as “finally not even meant to be replaced” and hiding the other in the obscurity by essentially starting the branding effort from scratch.

I hope that you, the people who actually make Perl 6 a reality, don't mind my use of “we” on this wall of text :) I love you all, and I trust you'll make the right call, whatever that call might be. I just felt like reacting with more than a glorified “:/” emoji ;)