November 17, 2011

The Term "Modern" Quickly Becomes Passé

I think that the intention behind "Modern Perl" is very, very good. Chromatic solved a lot of problems just by the fact that he called it all... something. But I don't agree with the use of the term "Modern" because -- ignoring the blazingly obvious answer -- what do you practically call the thing after "Modern"?

What should happen is that the spokesperson for the avant garde -- not an appointed position -- should take a set of CPAN modules/versions, best-practices, etc. and wrap it up into something that can be easily installed by a novice. And then pitch it to the community, affix a clever name to it, write a book, etc.

June 2, 2011

Search Engines Are Going With Microdata

With the launch of schema.org, Google, Yahoo, and Bing have endorsed the HTML5 Microdata format. The pragmatic, middle-ground approach of this format -- as seen in the schema.org's Type Hierarchy -- is why these companies settled on Microdata. It will ultimately lead to a wider acceptance of the semantic web, even if it is not RDFa!

The UMBC eBiquity blog has a pretty good summary article.

April 24, 2011

Foul Work Environment

Andy Lester ranted about the foul-mouthed community members who are messing up his open source work environment.

I'm tired of seeing yet another clueless missive from someone claiming that we don't have to be nice to each other, because hey, we're all adults here. I'm tired of hearing that profanity in written communication doesn't matter because hey, it's just words, man.

Source: Slipping away from the Perl community

February 4, 2011

Google Owns Their Search Results

There is unnecessary confusion in the Google-Bing controversy regarding the ownership of search results. While Vivek Wadhwa from TechCrunch is to be commended for illustrating Google's sly, attention-diverting tactics in this matter, Google still owns their search results. The very order of the most obscure search is the basis of their wealth.

The fact that these results might be flawed is irrelevant. Google did not just build the world's biggest distributed computer in order to create content that other companies can simply pass off as their own (and then profit from).

January 25, 2011

Rewriting Yourself Out of a Job

I just read an excellent article by Steve Blank about the dangers of Rewriting the Code.

I will add that being involved in a large code rewrite is also an excellent way to commit job suicide. I was phased out of my last job primarily because I bet the farm (at least my part of the farm) on a very complex architectural standardization effort. I enthusiastically followed what the team leader and a very prominent developer on the team wanted us all to do, which was as intricate and modern as perl5 can get. I chomped the bit and then got way in over my head while most everyone else continued working on incremental improvements to running systems.

As with working on any large project that does not have immediate business value, many aspects of a rewrite can attach a huge target around your neck. The political situation became as complex as the rewrite and I believe that putting all of my time into the rewrite (without hedging) -- and then defending my decision to do so -- ruined my position there.

In most organizations, a high-risk project like a rewrite might not be worth participating in unless you can get significant and provable buy-in from other developers on the team, not to mention political coverage from managers across the company. And if the support wanes, I would advise any developer stuck knee-deep in a rewrite to get working on something that is practical and much-appreciated.

Otherwise, the whole exercise can lose you your valuable time and energy, your mental well-being, your job, and even the friends that you made on the job.

Beware.