blogs.perl.org

The alternative title for this post would be Best Holiday Ever where I got to show my family some of the parts of Indonesia I visited as a child, and where we got to visit a hotel in a national park in Borneo in which my family has a business interest. In case you think this is a shameless plug, the vast majority of the income generated by the hotel goes back to the local people -- the investors are facilitators, for whom there may be a long term return.

Anyway, the point of my post wa…

Regarding my previous post "And suddenly you're hip"....

First of all: Finally accept that there are two Perls now. 5 and 6. Period. The world needs more Perl - here we have it. :) None of the two will go away. That's a good thing.

None of the following is new, but my suggestion would be to do it more in sync and at the same time and as a group to create a more event-style *cough* collective experience *cough* (think GSoC). It might also bring back people who have abadoned Perl but still ke…

Traditionally, the humanities journal has relied on Peer Review much like many academic disciplines. I believe firmly that Arxiv.org or something very much like it will replace the humanities journal in the near future, much like it has in the sciences. One of the main objections to this direction in the humanities is “what about peer review?” This is a major sticking point. The other is “will it count on the RAE/whatever management insanity we have to deal with at the moment?” I cannot answer the latter but I will give a vision of a solution for the former.

Peer Review is anonymous. This allows for people to be straight-forward in their assessment of a piece of writing. Errors both large and small can be brought to the author’s attention and fixed. How would one go about implementing a system to deal with this? First, Peer Review is usually done gratis so people could sign up to be in a pool of Peer Reviewers. On an Arxiv.org type site, this might show up in your “profile”. When an author submits a work, it is marked as “not peer reviewed” but it will show up in searches, etc. The author then submits the article for Peer Review. The system then randomly picks two Peer Reviewers to review the work. They then read and vote on the work. If they give “two thumbs up”, the article will be marked. If they give it “two thumbs up with changes”, the changes are given to the author who then makes (or not) the changes and it is resubmitted to the reviewers who give the final “up or down vote”. In the case of a tie in the voting, another Peer Reviewer is randomly selected and they look over the case for and against, the tie-breaker then does his job.

As you can see, this can all be automated. All you need is people willing to do the Peer Review thing. Also, who nominates people for Peer Review? That is a political question really but I would suggest that you use people who have credentials (PhD or above) from accredited universities. Yes, there will be some cranks but this will be evened out by the possibility of the third tie-break reviewers.

In the large, a user could watch the “un-peer reviewed” articles stream to look for new ideas and but only reference those which are peer reviewed or something like that. This would make scholarship so much easier to do rather than having to deal with publishers (who in the end only rent back to us work that was given mostly for free, which is a monumentally insane way of doing things) and Jstor.

On my previous post, Ron Savage has commented on the way he uses File::ShareDir with Moose, to be able to use data files in the author's code directory.

While I probably won't use this method since File::ShareDir specifically has the ability to use @INC (which makes my - and kmx's - solution possible), it does raise a very important note. You must make your code testable./var/www/index.html

Addition: I've made a more detailed list of event ideas.

This Perl marketing thing you know.. I'm really thinking about it every day. I've always wondered how those mechanism of "being THE it-language" or "the tool the cool kids use these days" or "success" in terms of "spreading everywhere" really works.

I've started with Linux in 1995 in Germany and I remember for example how the increasing database support on Linux was celebrated ".. and now XY is available under Linux" and how the s…

Overview

• We've adopted PSGI/Plack as our platform, enabling us to work in any HTTP environment.

• We've made massive changes to the Asset system to make them easier to build.

• We've reworked Auth to make it easier to add Twitter and Facebook authentication for your users.

• We've rebuilt the upgrade system…

Taco bell programming


This is a great article on simplicity and Unix. Very relivent to anyone that wants to understand Perl.

I've been working on a new website for a charitable business called HarrysButtons.com. I've been using Mojolicious as my web framework. I started off using Catalyst but I thought it was too heavy for my purposes, and the dependencies are killer on windos^h^h^hdows.

• Perl


• Templating System


• Small


• Few Depenencies


• Lightweight

The framework doesn't get in the way. It also doesn't shove paradigms down your throat…