Tips on perl.org
Why does perl.org dis on other languages?
"Perl -- It's like Java, only it lets you deliver on time and under budget."
Are you kidding me? Is that what we're about?
Instead, why don't we be critical about ourselves?
Did anyone notice that perl.org is just now looking like a site designed in the 90's?**
I hope the marketing committee takes their role seriously. Perl needs an identity that can carry it into the future. It's as if nobody wants to admit that a 5k - 15k grant to a GOOD designer to redesign a handful of our sites will do more for perl than half of the grant proposals currently out there. Instead of being passive and waiting for someone to propose a redesign we should have gone out and FOUND someone to do this years ago.
And what's the deal with the Camel all over the home page? Seriously! Is that not O'Reilly's symbol for perl? I'd much rather see 3 onions on the home page than an O'Reilly brand awareness campaign.
Take a look at the Rails 3.0 Release Notes. How freaking slick is that site? Not to mention usable, thought out, and timely. Instead of bashing Java, Ruby has embraced it and some pretty cool things have resulted in it.
Did you know that to some people a "pretty" site influences their judgement regarding the language/topic at hand? The fact that you're reading this probably means you could care less, but it's not about you anymore. We need to be reaching out if we want to keep this dusty language and culture alive. Sure, it might mean our culture changes in the process, but it sure as heck beats stagnation.
Perl is a great language and after reading the Perl 6 advent series I'm equally stoked for what's the come.
I'm not defending Java, and I'm not drunk on the Ruby punch. My thoughts are disorganized and I've probably got a few things wrong in this post. I'm sure others have argued these same points before, much more eloquently and effectively. I just had to get this off my chest. These things (and more) have bothered me for a long time.
I want to see Perl stay relevant. I want others to flock to this language because we have poised it to be welcoming and inviting. I want Perl to be seen as "cool" -- I think it is. I also think we can do a better job of selling it.
** no offense to whomever redesigned the site. It's definitely an improvement over what we had
Will Willis (silent11)
It was me that redesigned *.perl.org.
I think the TPF are still looking for someone to take on the Site design role (this does not mean they actually need to do the design themselves). I know JJ was doing some work in this area, but I'm sure he'd love some help.
If you are volunteering your time, please join the TPF marketing mailing list. I'd be happy to work with you on the Perl.org site - which isn't directly run by TPF by the way.
Personally I don't like that 'Java' comment, but some people did and there were far bigger issues to get resolved... remember the site used to look like this until November last year.
As for the Camel there was much discussion on this and I'm not going to go into it again - see the TPF marketing archives.
Your memory of 1990s web design is apparently somewhat different to mine.
I think the new perl.org looks great. But if you have some constructive suggestions for improvement, I'm sure that the marketing committee would love to hear them.
Yes, we know that. That's why Leo and some other people have spent a large proportion of their spare time over the last few months making a number of Perl sites look at lot better. I think they've done a great job. You, it seems, disagree.
Leo addresses the camel vs onion issue here.
The Java thing is a joke.
Yes it is all subjective, yes the new perl.org is a vast improvement!
But it's hard to deny that the Rails site is very slick, polished and professional. Perl related websites would definitely benefit from a bit more of that!
Well maybe not that much of a joke. Perl, & other dynamic languages, are known to be highly productive. At least so says empirical evidence from the Software Productivity Research group.
Even Java fundamentalists have been known to gasp at how few lines of Perl code are needed to achieve significant things.
When I whiped up this post last night I knew there'd be parts I'd come to regret (if not all of it).
So, after cooling off and getting some sleep...
Leo, I didn't mean to take anything out on you personally. The
redesing is a complte improvement over what we had. It's far better than anything I could do, that's for sure. Thanks for your contribution.
Dave, You're right. I didn't offer any constructive suggestions for improvement. I'm also grateful to those that have spent their spare cycles improving the design of our sites. I didn't mean to downplay all the hard work that so many people have contributed
to this effort.
Thanks for pointing out the camel vs onion thread. People do associate us with the Camel, like it or not. After I've lent my friend a copy of Learning Perl or the Camel book, it's probably a good idea to have some Camelidae (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelidae) on the home page of the site I'll send her to next. ~sigh~ I'm still not happy about that, but it is what it is.
And yes, I know that the poke at Java was a joke. Believe me, I dish it out to Java programmers every chance I get, and they dish it right back. I just didn't think it was an appropriate thing to have on our official site.
Thanks for the thearapy session everyone.
I'll make a better effort of doing something next time instead of
just complaining about it.
>"...Perl.org site - which isn't directly run by TPF by the way."
Perhaps that is part of the problem. If perl.org is Perl's front face for marketing, why isn't TPF running it directly?
>"As for the Camel there was much discussion..."
I still don't think this has been resolved. Yes, old people associate Perl with a camel. Do new users need to associate it with a book which hasn't had a new edition in 10 years?
>"...see the TPF marketing archives."
Where are those?