Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Path to raku #89

Merged
merged 83 commits into from Oct 14, 2019

Conversation

@lizmat
Copy link
Member

lizmat commented Aug 17, 2019

The implementation of #81

Please note, this is only the initial version of the PR, intended for
internal discussion / augmentation before being turned into a real
("draft") PR, for wider discussion / voting.
@taboege

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

taboege commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 13, 2019

The .code method already exists in some classes (e.g. CallFrame) and could conceivably be used in modules. Why not rename .perl (print this so that perl6 instands it) to .raku (print this so that raku understands it)? I see no reason not to, except that we're not yet used to it referring to a language :-)

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

For me, the .code method makes more sense to me than .perl or .raku. It's name is more universal and therefor more easily understood. There is no need to be self referential here.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ replied Aug 14, 2019

👍 on .code. But we need to add changing the already existing .code methods to something else. It's actually only in two classes, so it wouldn't be a big deal.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel replied Aug 14, 2019

I agree with @nxadm. .code just feels better to me, but the fact that .code method exists in other classes is kinda unfortunate :S

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

taboege replied Aug 14, 2019

Yeah, .code is nicely generic, I like that too. But that is why a .code attribute is meanwhile also used by module authors (← contains a sizable amount of false positives) to denote:

  • HTTP status or native library error codes,
  • BSON type byte,
  • XML source code,
  • callbacks.

So .code vs. .raku vs. … also needs to be weighed against the

[...] existing scripts continue to work without change

part in "Technical Changes". .code means some unbitrotting, .raku doesn't.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

vendethiel replied Aug 15, 2019

Clearly should be .EVAL-able ;-).

@taboege

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

taboege commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 13, 2019

Not sure if this comment zooms in too much for the scope of this document, but the IRC channels on freenode are my primary community meeting point and they have to be renamed as well. I just want to note that luckily we can forward #perl6 to #raku (for new joins at least, not for messages) using +if #raku channel modes. freenode++

@hythm7

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

hythm7 commented on 07c423e Aug 13, 2019

Thanks @lizmat for writing that.

wrt. the mascot, Camelia has p6 drawn on it, wondering if it should be replaced with raku or rk.

r   u
 a k

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

coke replied Aug 13, 2019

IRC channels?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

Thanks @lizmat for writing that.

wrt. the mascot, Camelia has p6 drawn on it, wondering if it should be replaced with raku or rk.

r   u
 a k

Most people miss the P6 letters anyway, so it could be left there for historical reasons. If it's decided to remove the P6 reference, I don't see the need to add the raku letters. Less is more.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

FCO replied Aug 14, 2019

What about “use v6”?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

FCO replied Aug 14, 2019

Will it be Raku v6.d or Raku vd or Raku v1.d or what?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

hythm7 replied Aug 14, 2019

What happens to NQP, will it become NQR?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

hythm7 replied Aug 14, 2019

@hythm7 :

wrt. the mascot, Camelia has p6 drawn on it, wondering if it should be replaced with raku or rk.

r   u
 a k

I was the one who has the mascotte made into 1,000 copies of the stuffed toy and I do not want to explain that it has cost a lot of time, energy, frustration and money, and since I still have over 500 of them, I am not planning on having another batch made. Not for the foreseeable future. In case of a namechange, I think I just have to throw them all away, burn them, turn them into compost, whatever. :-(

I think no changes required for the mascot even after name change. There is a nice suggestion mentioned above to leave the mascot as is and the p 6 "could be seen as lasting tribute (easter egg) to the origin of Raku".

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

Grinnz replied Aug 14, 2019

For the reddit community it looks like raiph already has https://www.reddit.com/r/raku/ (appears to have briefly been about pottery) secured.

EDIT: Meaning that it is under control of this community. It was barely used and raiph convinced them to transfer it over.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

I was the one who has the mascotte made into 1,000 copies of the stuffed toy and I do not want to explain that it has cost a lot of time, energy, frustration and money, and since I still have over 500 of them, I am not planning on having another batch made. Not for the foreseeable future. In case of a namechange, I think I just have to throw them all away, burn them, turn them into compost, whatever. :-(

No, you don't. Most likely Camelia will not change. And if it does, you'll have collection items that will interest many hackers.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

What happens to NQP, will it become NQR?

Not Quite Ready.

@AlexDaniel

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 13, 2019

There's also .pod6 extension that we currently use. It has both “pod” in it, which really doesn't mean much to most people, and the 6 which will be mostly obsolete after the rename. Maybe .rakudoc? A bit too long, but it seems to work fine for .asciidoc so why not… I don't know. I think it is also possible to defer it for now.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

Grinnz replied Aug 13, 2019

The documentation format is also called Pod 6, so it should probably be coordinated with whether that name is changed.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

Grinnz replied Aug 13, 2019

My thoughts on that, but not much of an opinion either way: Pod 6 is much more like a revision of Pod and is very similar in use and appearance, there is an active attempt at some compatibility, and it's referred to as just Pod in various places. But it is not 100% compatible. It's just not that important comparatively, you currently don't find much about either Pod or Pod 6 on google without using the language name, and nobody is ever really in a situation to discover what Pod or Pod 6 are without the context of the languages. So the only reason to do such would be for consistency in naming or to better distinguish itself from Pod in the future.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

.rkpod?: it's pod after all, a format unknown and unpopular outside of the Perl world.
.rkdoc? This would make more sense if it was md based as expectations would be to be read on the console with less or cat without a pod parser in your head.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ replied Aug 14, 2019

Ugh, no. Let's keep Pod6. It's a slang, included but different from Perl 6/Raku. Are we going to call the regex slang rkegex? Or the quote slang rkuote? It's not big deal. It does not have Perl in the name, it's just a six-ish version of plain old documentation.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

FCO replied Aug 14, 2019

.rkp or .rp?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

pod6 sound very out of place to me for a language called raku. Pod is werid, the 6 makes it even weirder. (Now I think about it is even weird for Perl 6.)

@vrurg

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

I think it would be a good time to take care of executable name in another aspect. Rakudo must not occupy raku name if we really anticipate other compilers for the language. It must install as rakudo and optionally symlink to raku.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm replied Aug 14, 2019

Every implementation can supply a raku executable (it's actually an implementation of raku). Package managers and the 'alternatives' system can the select which one will be the first in PATH. This is pretty much how Java and python implementations work.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg replied Aug 14, 2019

My point was to make the life of package managers easier.

@vrurg

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

I will prepare another PR for this part.

@nxadm

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

nxadm commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

Also popular: a 'p6' prefix (or suffix).

@FCO

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

FCO commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

Will it continue with the “p” and the “6” on the wings?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ replied Aug 14, 2019

We can add a whisker to the p to make it look like an R and delete a part of the 6 to make it look like a k.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

karenetheridge replied Aug 14, 2019

I ❤️ Camelia; let's keep her as she is, as a reminder of where she came from :)

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member Author

lizmat replied Aug 15, 2019

@karenetheridge That's the plan. No changes to the wing pattern either :-)

@JJ

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

We'll need to open an issue for this. It might be more extensive than that, including the fact that we need to change. We can add an issue for this in the doc repo, and work on that.

@JJ

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

In the case of documentation, we might want to keep the two sites at the same time for people that keep using old versions of perl 6. We would do this redirect eventually, in a 1-2 year time frame.

@JJ

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

Will we keep using the "use v6;" pragma? After all, there's no way to mistake raku for perl now.

@vrurg

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in e4461ed Aug 14, 2019

I don't see why 6. must go away. As far as I remember, raku in rakudo came as a consonant to roku which is 6. This would also be a way to keep Raku's DNA.

Switching to uppercase letters though coincide with rakudo/rakudo#3112 which is yet to be accepted, but proposes CORE::<uppercase-revision>:: namespace.

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member Author

AlexDaniel replied Aug 14, 2019

@vrurg So, I see it like this. Currently we don't have proper versioning of the language, and instead we use -errata branches (which are changing all the time, even if the fixes are minor). That doesn't sound right to me, especially if we subscribe to the idea that there could be more than one implementation. So in the end we might need minor versions, or something, and I don't like any short-sighted attempts to change the situation without taking other things into account. As for the letters, if we do something like 6.d.2, then question is why not just go full semver, and if so, then why are we using letters at all (even if it's allowed by semver, nobody really does it the way we do).

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg replied Aug 14, 2019

This turns into a wider discussion. I'll open a new topic on this.

@vrurg

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

There was a move to use .t6 for tests. Considering that some IDEs/editors determine file type exclusively by the extension and do so not even project-wide but system-wide (i.e. whatever is project's main language, .t would always be treated as, say, perl5), I think a proposal for this extension would make sense too. .rkt belongs to Racket language. .tr perhaps?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Member

FCO replied Aug 14, 2019

.rt?

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg replied Aug 14, 2019

.rt reminds of RealTime Player. Yet, .tr follows the patter of .t6. But that's very minor question, I just wanted it to be mentioned, not resolved yet. :)

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

Grinnz replied Aug 14, 2019

.t is a funny extension. It is not perl-specific to begin with - it can technically be any language that is given in the shebang or by the program that is expected to run them. But Perl and Raku do seem to be highest users of it. The only harm of reusing .t in my opinion is that editors and GitHub have a hard time classifying what language they belong to. Personally I have no qualms with multiple languages using .t, provided they are okay with that potential problem.

@dwright

This comment was marked as resolved.

Copy link

dwright commented on PATH-TO-RAKU.md in 07c423e Aug 14, 2019

It's worth noting that the more general entity is already called "Yet Another Society". YAS is currently home to both "The Perl Foundation" and "The Parrot Foundation". It might be worth the legwork of setting up a separate "Raku Foundation" under YAS.

It would probably be a good idea for you to open up a dialog with TPF to help them understand your intent and find out what TPF is able/willing to provide.

@patzim

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

patzim commented Sep 30, 2019

@AlexDaniel

It seems that nobody wants to even think about issues with extensions, so I give in.

I think the reason many people are hesitant to continue discussing extensions is, because it is unclear whether the discussion is currently allowed or wanted. The word "bikeshedding" has been thrown around multiple times and there have been three PRs all with the goal of getting the discussion over with ASAP. This topic is currently emotionally loaded and people are afraid to get caught in the crossfire.

@AlexDaniel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented Sep 30, 2019

I think the reason many people are hesitant to continue discussing extensions is, because it is unclear whether the discussion is currently allowed or wanted. The word "bikeshedding" has been thrown around multiple times and there have been three PRs all with the goal of getting the discussion over with ASAP. This topic is currently emotionally loaded and people are afraid to get caught in the crossfire.

Sure, and I totally understand that. But there won't be any other time to discuss it. Unless I'm completely misunderstanding something, this is the only time to discuss the extensions.

@vrurg

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

vrurg commented Sep 30, 2019

Also, somebody needs to take care of perl6/user-experience#19. It would be nice to have some dedicated effort to help editors get up to date (compared to waiting for years for them to catch up naturally), but I won't be spending any time on that issue.

@AlexDaniel if my list inclusion PR gets approved, then I expect this to be part of my duties.

@JJ

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented Oct 4, 2019

Ping?

@lizmat

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

lizmat commented Oct 4, 2019

FWIW, I'm getting very depressed about the lack of movement (again). And getting more and more tempted to just close the issue and the associated PR, and write my last Perl 6 Weekly on Monday.

@AlexDaniel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented Oct 4, 2019

@lizmat a little bit of patience, please? Currently we're 10 9.5 days away from the merge. Things like this shouldn't happen overnight anyway. We've had the wrong name for years, the amount of days we have to wait now is nothing compared to that.

Ping @jnthn @maettu @masak @MasterDuke17 @rba @samcv @timo @tony-o @ugexe

I know some of you already approved the PR, but there were some changes, so please take a look at them and leave a review again.

@AlexDaniel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented Oct 4, 2019

Also, given how nobody is asking for more changes to this PR, we can probably work on things that need to be done after the rename, like perl6/doc#2951. Obviously none of that should be on master before the merge here, but I see no reason not to start preparing, especially if we're that impatient.

@duncand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

duncand commented Oct 4, 2019

@lizmat Please don't close the issue or PR. They need to stay open and be seen through to completion. These things can take time but the momentum is forward.

@MasterDuke17 MasterDuke17 self-requested a review Oct 4, 2019
@nxadm
nxadm approved these changes Oct 4, 2019
@masak
masak approved these changes Oct 5, 2019
Copy link
Member

masak left a comment

It's an exquisite kind of torture to have to repeatedly approve this PR (for reasons I believe I've stated clearly elsewhere), but here comes another approval from me.

@samcv
samcv approved these changes Oct 5, 2019
@AlexDaniel AlexDaniel requested review from jnthn and timo Oct 5, 2019
@jnthn
jnthn approved these changes Oct 7, 2019
Copy link
Member

jnthn left a comment

Sorry for the delay; I thought I'd already re-approved this last week.

@JJ

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented Oct 7, 2019

Sorry for the delay; I thought I'd already re-approved this last week.

We all did... Only those approvals were invalidated when new commits were added.

@AlexDaniel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented Oct 9, 2019

Here's a quick update with a clarification because the problem-solving document is worded in a way that is not entirely clear (I'll work on fixing that after we merge this). Basically, everyone has to approve this PR so that we can merge it, but if someone doesn't leave a github review in 14 days, then their approval won't be blocking the merge.

Now, some people explicitly abstained, which is totally fine. However:

By approving a PR the dev confirms that they reviewed and understood the proposal, and that they are OK with it.

So, as I see it, clicking Approve doesn't have to mean that you're fully an advocate of a rename, just that you're fine with the change.

Anyway, as of right now nobody requested any other changes (meaning that we're heading for the merge!), but some people still didn't leave a github review, which means we'll have to wait a bit.

To keep it safe, it'll be 14 days since the voting was restarted. This means that this PR will be merged on October 14th if nobody in the list rejects it or requests more changes.

Because this is a massive change, I'm pinging the reviewers again.
@JJ @jnthn @lizmat @maettu @masak @MasterDuke17 @rba @samcv @timo @tony-o @ugexe

@ugexe

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

ugexe commented Oct 9, 2019

I have not been convinced and am against this. I am choosing to abstain entirely due to the loss of a core developer otherwise. Let us not misconstrue this as a victory as multiple people have decided to abstain despite not agreeing with the principle of the name change -- this result is thus entirely the result of politics, and lacks the technical arguments to have resulted in a true unanimous decision. I hope for my own sake I don't regret not declining this in the future.

@lizmat

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

lizmat commented Oct 9, 2019

this result is thus entirely the result of politics

Indeed. But sometimes politics are needed. You might remember the VHS video standard. Or even Betamax (which was technically superior to VHS). But nobody remembers the Video 2000 standard, which was technically superior to both Betamax and VHS.

I also really wish this wasn't necessary.

@ugexe

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

ugexe commented Oct 10, 2019

Indeed. But sometimes politics are needed. You might remember the VHS video standard. Or even Betamax (which was technically superior to VHS). But nobody remembers the Video 2000 standard, which was technically superior to both Betamax and VHS.

Videotape format war was not won by name, it was won by a technically superior price point. There is nothing in history to suggest Betamax could have won with a different name.

@TimToady TimToady self-requested a review Oct 11, 2019
Copy link
Member

TimToady left a comment

I am in favor of this change, because it reflects an ancient wisdom:

“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”

@ugexe ugexe removed their request for review Oct 11, 2019
@duncand

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

duncand commented Oct 11, 2019

I am in favor of this change, because it reflects an ancient wisdom:

“No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch will pull away from the garment, making the tear worse. Neither do people pour new wine into old wineskins. If they do, the skins will burst; the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.”

Wonderful! That's the best endorsement this could get!

Before my thought was just asking for @TimToady blessing on the maintainers' group decision, but it came preemptively!

@timo
timo approved these changes Oct 13, 2019
@AlexDaniel AlexDaniel merged commit b0669a0 into master Oct 14, 2019
@AlexDaniel

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

AlexDaniel commented Oct 14, 2019

Thanks everyone for your participation! It's Raku now. It will take some time before the rename is fully complete, but you should see it coming into effect very soon.

@JJ

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

JJ commented Oct 14, 2019

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
You can’t perform that action at this time.