__sawyer.txt

sawyer posted this email ~40 minutes ago
 https://perl.topicbox.com/groups/perl-core/T7a4f1bf9e069641f/i-am-stepping-down-from-psc-and-core-effective-immediately

in it he alleges "abusive behavior", "harassment", "publicly shaming",
"bullying"

from the text i know he means mst, and likely also me, and possibly others,
particularly as he deleted his twitter account within a few minutes after
message ⚫ #24 below

i'm sorry that i wasn't able to word myself in a way that did not feel to him
like i'm going after him
at the same time, i do not believe i deserve the accusations

as such, the record of this last conversation, as accurate as i can represent
it. on rereading, several people made typos and used words they didn't mean.
i preserve the text as original and encourage keeping this in mind

the ⚫ #number of messages here is chronological

links to the various thread chains:

start: https://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/status/1381286479578681347
#15: https://twitter.com/mithaldu/status/1381327753455271943
#23: https://twitter.com/mithaldu/status/1381330901737562112
#24: https://twitter.com/nokusu/status/1381331554824228865

all other tweets are as of yet undeleted and i believe they will stay up.
screenshots of sawyer's tweets below

⚫ #0 mst
It looks like we're going forwards with 'use v7', which means future releases
will still be able to be /usr/bin/perl This was the right decision. Many thanks
to @PerlSawyer @neilb @rjbs for listening to people and taking time to think
things through.
https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2021/04/msg259789.html

	⚫ #1 cestith
	So no choosing which Perl runs for /usr/bin/perl7 and which Perl /usr/bin/perl
	or and which is /usr/bin/perl like with some other languages? Will I be able to
	use 7's features without 'use v7' if I do name the executable 'perl7'? Does
	using 'use v7'm mean keeping all the cruft?

		⚫ #2 mithaldu
		> use 7's features without 'use v7' if I do name the executable 'perl7'?
		maybe
		be aware that IDEs, PPI, Perl::Critic, syntax highlighters and other tools will
		treat whatever code you write as perl 5 without `use x;`
		> keeping all the cruft?
		depends on what you mean by cruft

			⚫ #3 mst
			The people actually doing work on perl core don't seem to find the 'cruft'
			problematic and if they do we can rip out stuff after a deprecation period like
			normal, so unless/until somebody who knows the core code objects I consider that
			an imaginary problem.

				⚫ #4 nokusu
				THINK OF THE MAINTENANCE COST is hilarious when the maintainers themselves don't
				mind it.

					⚫ #5 mithaldu
					to make this somewhat more of a quip, several core devs have said that the value
					of removing perl internals is dubious:
					https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2021/04/msg259724.html

					⚫ #6 sawyer
					This is not true. The Perl maintainers often have to deal with cruft. We don't
					like it. There's a lot we wish we could remove and it would make our jobs much
					easier.

						⚫ #14 grinnz
						This is not true, as the Perl maintainers have stated.
						https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2020/06/msg257566.html 
						https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2020/08/msg258191.html 
						https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2021/04/msg259724.html

							⚫ #15 mithaldu
							thanks for putting the whole list together

							⚫ #16 sawyer
							Emails are nice to have. We've had numerous discussions in person at
							Perl Summits that said otherwise.

						⚫ #7 mst
						If you can find heavy C-level contributors like LeoNerd or DaveM or etc. saying
						that I'd be interested to see.
						Talking to the people who actually hack on that part of the code a lot tends to
						result in more comments like this one than anything else:
						https://nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl5.porters/2021/04/msg259724.html

							⚫ #8 mithaldu
							yeah, i tried to point this out below as well
							and i think it should be mentioned that the email linked is from nicholas clark,
							so there's 3 core maintainers who hold that the important of cruft in perl code
							is in doubt
							<link to ⚫ #5>

							⚫ #9 sawyer
							I have no interest in discussing anything with you, Matt.

								⚫ #11 mithaldu
								please read the email tho, i don't give a damn if you listen to matt or me or
								anyone else
								but least
								listen to NWCLARK, PEVANS and Dave Mitchell

									⚫ #13 sawyer
									I have no interest in engaging with Matt at all on anything, and I'm not trying
									to convince you of anything. You can consider me wrong if you wish. I'm fine
									with that.

										⚫ #17 mithaldu
										wrong or not is my concern, i'm just trying to nudge you and the core devs
										towards synchronicity between their most recent statements and yours

											⚫ #18 sawyer
											You will not get it. We flip flop. We say one thing, then consider the opposite
											in other contexts. Numerous in-person meetings have reviewed things we would
											love to review, things that are in our way. We know this. We talk about it.
											Emails in context might reflect elsewhere.

												⚫ #19 sawyer
												And pushing me for saying a single thing is not going to make everything
												suddenly synchronous. So please, just accept that people don't always say
												everything 100% consistently and let me put a single word into the world without
												criticizing it.

													⚫ #22 mithaldu
													please note that i only asked you to read the email, not to say a specific thing
													if you read those words and hold by your opinion in opposition, that is fine to
													me. i would in fact be curious why because it means i can learn

														⚫ #23 mithaldu
														also i would hope my last p5p email (plus many others) was a good example of not
														criticizing every word you say

								⚫ #10 mst
								Then we'll leave it at you having made an unfounded assertion about the
								maintainers' opinions and me having provided actual evidence, and I'll keep
								discussing things with the people writing the code to ensure I have an accurate
								understanding myself.

									⚫ #12 sawyer
									I'm not having any form of conversation with you, Matt.

										⚫ #20 mst
										That's your prerogative, but in that case I'm confused why you jumped into a
										thread I started explicitly to contradict me - if you don't want to engage with
										me, then joining the thread specifically to engage with what I said is a little
										strange to me.

											⚫ #21 sawyer
											Matt, you need to leave me alone. Take "I don't want to talk to you" as an answer.

												⚫ #24 nokusu
												FYI you can untag people you don't want to interact with, instead of replying to
												them and then complaining when they reply back.

screenshot_-1.png

screenshot_-2.png

screenshot_-3.png

i have informed mst :D