Tim Peters writes: > > About people not moving to 2.0, the single specific reason I hear most often > hinges on presumed lack of GPL compatibility. But then people worried about > that *have* a specific reason stopping them. For everyone else, I know > sysadmins who still refuse to move up from Perl 4. > > BTW, we recorded thousands of downloads of 2.0 betas at BeOpen.com, and > indeed more than 10,000 of the Windows installer alone. Then their download > stats broke. SF's have been broken for a long time. So while we have no > idea how many people are downloading now, the idea that people stayed away > from 2.0 in droves is wrong. And 2.0-specific examples are common on c.l.py > now from lots of people too. I agree. I think people are moving to 2.0, but not at the rate of keeping-up with the current release cycle. By the time 2/3 of them have installed 2.0, 2.1 will be released. So what's the point of installing 2.0, when a few weeks later, you have to install 2.1? The situation at our institution is a good indicator of this: 2.0 becomes the default this week. -- Dr. Paul Barrett Space Telescope Science Institute Phone: 410-338-4475 ESS/Science Software Group FAX: 410-338-4767 Baltimore, MD 21218
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4