Problem-solving: "Perl" in the name "Perl 6" is confusing and irritating

[lizmat]

Perl 6 was initially conceived to be the next version of Perl. It took way too long to mature to an initial release. Meanwhile, people interested in taking Perl 5 along, took back the reigns and continued developing Perl 5.

Having two programming languages that are sufficiently different to not be source compatible, but only differ in what many perceive to be a version number, is hurting the image of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 in the world. Since the word "Perl" is still perceived as "Perl 5" in the world, it only seems fair that "Perl 6" changes its name.

Since Larry has indicated, in his video message to the participants of PerlCon 2019 in Riga, that the two sister languages are now old and wise enough to take care of themselves, such a name change would no longer require the approval of the BDFL.

[lizmat]

I would therefore propose to change the name to "the Camelia Programming Language" or "Camelia" for short, for several reasons:

• the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to the right place. This means that changing the name to "Camelia" will have minimal impact on findability on search engines such as Google and DuckDuckGo.

• the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also becomes the actual name of the programming language.

• "Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.

• The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in "roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to indicate an implementation, and would endanger the separation between specification and implementation.

• Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my preference for a known name such as "Camelia".

• The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that he helped get into the world.

EDIT: Damian Conway had persuasive reasons to use "Raku" instead of "Camelia". My proposal is therefore changed to use the name Raku instead.

[AlexDaniel]

Because we don't have this type of tickets very often, here's a reminder of how it goes for solutions that require consensus, specifically for this ticket:

• Changing the language name is a change to the language, so @jnthn will be directing the progress on this ticket.
• Once a particular solution is chosen (e.g. Camelia), it'd need to be submitted as a pull request (once jnthn decides that the particular solution is worth trying). The pull request should at the very least tweak “Perl” mentions in the README.md, other requirements (if any) will be specified by jnthn.
• Usually, more proposals are welcome right from the start, but I think in this case we should refrain from spamming more suggestions (something other than “Camelia”) unless jnthn really wants to look for a different name.
• Everyone in this list will need to approve the change, and the idea is that as grown ups we should eventually get to the same decision through civil discussion. If you're not in that list but you're involved in this project and the change affects you significantly, you should submit a PR adding yourself.
• This ticket will likely get a lot of comments, so please try to keep them small and on point.

Edit1: clarified that the PR is only needed later once jnthn is OK with the change
Edit2: recommend people to be short and on point

[nxadm]

I agree wholeheartedly with @lizmat. The name Perl 6 dates from a time when the project had a completely different scope and timetable. Today, people outside the Perl echo chamber can't differentiate between Perl 5 and Perl 6, besides making the wrong --but obvious-- assumption the former is the old version and the latter the new one. Perl 6 is a new language with a smaller community and ecosystem compared to Perl 5, and like every new language needs to find its own way to a wider usage. This needs to be acknowledged: there is only so far you can go on the shoulder of the older language.

On one hand, Perl 5 is damaged by the startup status op Perl 6, not only because of the squatting of the next major number, but also because the new language can't yet deliver on what people expect from a top 10 language. Why would they give Perl 5 a chance when the latest version has a very small ecosystem and not a lot of jobs available yet? On the other hand, there is no denying that the popularity of Perl 5 is decreasing. Why would you try this hip new language when the main implementation is loosing mindshare?

@lizmat bets of the success of both languages, and who know, maybe it can be still one meta-community.

[genehack]

The video from Larry referenced by Liz in the ticket description can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2e0xSOHd-0

[nige123]

Here are some criteria for a good language name:

• distinctive
• shortish (< 6 characters)
• good Google find-ability
• command-line type-ability
• easy to read
• straightforward to pronounce
• easy to spell
• avoid hardwiring version numbers into the name (e.g., red6)
• not cause confusion
• not used by other major software projects / companies
• not trademarked already (in international classes: 9, 16, 41, 42)

"Camelia" ticks many of these boxes, although I prefer something shorter to type at the command-line. I wonder if we can come up with something shorter?

shell> camelia hello.cml
shell> cml hello.ca
shell> cm hello.cma
shell> ca hello.ca

"raku" and "ofun" were two names that ticked all the boxes above.

[RayMPerry]

I don't have much of a horse in this race - in fact, this is my first comment - but, regarding the previous comment, camelia doesn't necessarily need to be the name of the command-line tool. In D, they use either dmd/gdc/ldc or dub. Maybe the same concept could apply here?

[vrurg]

Perhaps Camelia must not be a command line tool. Perhaps it has to be:

$ rakudo -v 
This is Rakudo version 2019.07.1-126-g90ffa349c built on MoarVM version 2019.07.1-72-g352ae27e4
implementing Camelia 6.d.

Anyway, renaming would result in so many different sorts of problems ranging in severity from "nah, nothing to worry about" to "oh, f*!" that compiler's name could simply be ignored as irrelevant.

As to the name itself. I personally don't care about it as I care more about the language itself. Yet, Camelia I like more than any other proposal so far. Actually, I just like it.

[nxadm]

@vrurg That is pretty much what rakudo-pkg does for Linux packages (link "perl6" to "rakudo" and "raku"):

https://github.com/nxadm/rakudo-pkg/blob/master/docker/pkg_rakudo.pl#L64

[ajs]

Here are some pros and cons that I don't see discussed above:

• "Perl 6" as a name has been around just shy of 20 years. It has a lot of history both inside and outside of the Perl community. There are documents like the one I just published today (Your Regex Here that aren't within the scope of anything this proposal will change, leading to potential confusion for years to come.
• Given the above timeline, imagine the proposal in the mid-2000s to change the name of perl (then Perl version 5) to LarryLang. The fact that that's a terrible name would not be in my top 10 reasons to dismiss the suggestion.
• But on the positive, a name change means, in some sense, a clean break with the history. There's a sense that Perl 6 is "never done" and when it _is done_ it seems wise to draw that line in the sand.
• On the other hand, _is it done_? There's a pretty high signal boost in a name change, and if that signal-boosts "not done yet" then that's what this name will mean in the public consciousness forever.
• It does start with "C", and I personally like the call-back to C in our ancestry.
• I never saw a good analysis of why "Raku" seemed to fall so flat on the broader community.

[wbraswell]

I have already been promoting "Perl 6 AKA Raku", and I will be quite happy to promote "Perl 6 AKA Camelia" in the future, if this proposal is accepted. I will even be willing to drop the "Perl 6" eventually and just talk about "Camelia" as a language.

For the record, I like both names "Raku" and "Camelia", although I tend to agree with most everything @lizmat says (in general), so if she thinks "Camelia" is better then I will support this proposal 100%.

[lindleyw]

The right proposal at the right time.

[tadzik]

Frankly, I don't think I agree.

The reality is confusing (and irritating) as you say – no doubt about that. In hindsight, it was probably a mistake to name Perl 6 “Perl 6”, or maybe it was a mistake to not actually replace Perl 5 in a reasonable timeframe. However, I think the damage is done and the ship has sailed. I think the confusion may be with us forever, and I really don't think that a name change is going to do anything about it.

I don't see how Perl 5 is going to benefit from this. We're freeing the name, yes. They're free to reuse the versions now in however way they like, yes. Are they going to name the successor to 5.30 “Perl 6”? Of course not – that would cause more confusion, make them look stupid and make whatever spiritual successor of Perl 6 we could think of look obsolete. Would they go up to Perl 7 with the next major change? Perhaps, but they can do that anyway: they're another grown-up language that can make its own decisions :)

I'm not convinced it would do anything to improve Perl 6's image either. Being Perl 6 is “standing on the shoulders of giants”. Perl is a strong brand. Many people have left it because of the version confusion, yes. But I don't imagine these people coming back to check out some new Camelia language that came out. They might however decide to give Perl 6 a shot if they start seeing some news about it – “oh, I was using Perl 15 years ago... is this still a thing? Is that new famous version finally being out and useful? I should check it out!”

Additionally, I think that aside from the potential benefits of the change we should consider the potential damage. Once the word gets out that “Perl 6 is no longer being developed”, do you think that this will do Perl 5 any good? The fact that their supposed replacement was “finally abandoned”? Then also, people who decide to check out Camelia years from now, aren't they going to think “oh, wait, that's that Perl 6 thing that was actually dropped” – or maybe “oh, that looks like some sort of a weird spin of this Perl 7 that came out recently”.

Especially considering the potential damage to both our languages and communities, I think at the very least the Perl 5 community should be consulted on this. I know some of them have previously expressed joy at the idea of “the freeing of the name”, often for dubious reasons, but I think the issue is bigger than just us and it's fair to consider the opinion of at least the Perl 5 pumpking – and ideally also the Perl 5 loosely defined “cabal” :)

Now, I get that this issue is brought up whenever a question or a myth or a problem of the popularity of Perl, 5 or 6, is brought up – and for an understandable reason. The name confusion is a marketing and a visibility problem. But is it really the problem? Isn't the renaming idea a micro-optimization of the image of Perl?

C and C++ don't seem to be bothered by it too much. Neither do C and D. Or C++ and C# (the latter of which I like to read as C-plus-plus-plus-plus ;)). Nobody doubts that C++ is alive, that C is still a thing etc. Nobody really considers either of them dead. And the reason for that, I think, is that both of them are very much visible in the programming world, and not just in their own bubbles (except for D, perhaps). There's still people who get confused at the idea of C and C++ – or Java and JavaScript – but those are not actual programmers who are interested in this thing. Nobody who follows the programming community (and the “market”) in any way would ever confuse any pair of these. I think that's because all of these languages have a strong enough presence that any name problem of theirs is not really a problem at all.

I feel like the name debate gets brought up – by both sides – as a scapegoat of bigger issues. The reason why Perl 5 is considered dead is because the overwhelming majority of those considerers haven't seen Perl 5 being used in the last 10 years – and probably haven't seen a Perl 5 programmer either. Same goes for Perl 6 – it's hard to argue that Perl 6 is finished and ready when a single hand is more than enough to count the real-world uses of it. These issues will not go away with the rename. Perl, the old Perl 5, will still need to prove itself as the “still alive and better than ever”. Camelia, the old Perl 6, will still need to prove that it's a relevant language in a saturated programming market – and this time without the existing brand recognition and legacy that it has. A new name is not a killer app.

I think the renaming would do more harm than good. I'm not convinced that it will by itself change anything in the public image – whoever cares about Perl already knows the difference, and whoever does not care will not even bother to read the renaming announcements. If the Perl family of languages are to make – and enlarge – their impact on the world it has to be done with code, not words – semantics, not syntax, if you pardon the awful pun.

In any case, if Perl 6 is indeed to be renamed, I'd rather if it took a side turn rather than teleporting completely elsewhere. A name like “Perlsix” would still, imho, pass all the tests in our naming test suite, while it would also show pride of our legacy rather than running away from it. The world and the market of programming languages is crowded and cruel. I think we stand a better chance as a two-headed monster than by marking one of us as “finally not even meant to be replaced” and hiding the other in the obscurity by essentially starting the branding effort from scratch.

I hope that you, the people who actually make Perl 6 a reality, don't mind my use of “we” on this wall of text :) I love you all, and I trust you'll make the right call, whatever that call might be. I just felt like reacting with more than a glorified “:/” emoji ;)

[jberger]

Are they going to name the successor to 5.30 “Perl 6”? Of course not – that would cause more confusion, make them look stupid and make whatever spiritual successor of Perl 6 we could think of look obsolete. Would they go up to Perl 7 with the next major change? Perhaps, but they can do that anyway: they're another grown-up language that can make its own decisions :)

I hope that this proposal, which I support, doesn't get derailed by how Perl 5 will respond to it. Clearly though, it will need to do some corresponding change to un-confuse the story from that side as well. Certainly the number 6 would never be used. I would propose doing what Java did and "promote" the "minor" version number. In that way Camelia could live in harmony with Perl 32 or whatever the current minor release is when it happens and there would be plenty of intellectual space between 6 and 32 or whatever that hopefully no one is confused by that going forward. Of course that's not my call either and it will be up to p5p to make whatever choice they feel will break the marketing log jam and help both languages assert their "not dead"-ness to the world at large, which I think we all agree, is the goal, even if we sometimes differ on how to get there.

[Grinnz]

Especially considering the potential damage to _both_ our languages and communities, I think at the very least the Perl 5 community should be consulted on this. I know some of them have previously expressed joy at the idea of “the freeing of the name”, often for dubious reasons, but I think the issue is bigger than just us and it's fair to consider the opinion of at least the Perl 5 pumpking – and ideally also the Perl 5 loosely defined “cabal” :)

I will stay out of this except to say, from the side of the Perl 5 "cabal", I wholeheartedly support this proposal and the potential "damages" you cite to Perl 5 are in my opinion non-issues, especially compared to the damage that continues to be done by "Perl 6" existing officially. Proper marketing is everything.

[Kaiepi]

They might however decide to give Perl 6 a shot if they start seeing some news about it – “oh, I was using Perl 15 years ago... is this still a thing? Is that new famous version finally being out and useful? I should check it out!”

The language being called Perl 6 may be beneficial for swaying former Perl users to use it, but what about people that have never used Perl before? I find the opposite is the case most of the time; people don't want to try Perl 6 because they see Perl and think "oh that's that write-only language" when Perl 6 doesn't have that issue at all. Perl's a strong brand, sure, but we can't ignore the reputation it's gained among people that don't use it.

FTR, I'm still undecided as to whether or not I support this.

[vrurg]

Evolution vs. revolution... Such abrupt name change being done at once is a revolution. While sometimes revolutions bring changes for better, they're always harmful and painful. Evolution takes longer and may end up in a dead end, but it's usually more reliable process and provides more stable results.

Here is what I mean by that. Maybe we must do what was supposed to be done for Raku? Make it _Perl 6 Camelia_ and just give it a chance. If over time _Camelia_ takes over then this is how things are supposed to be. And if not – _Perl 6_ will thrive forever.

In either case, _Perl 6_ is occupied now and forever. It will most assuredly remain in the sources and many docs for long if not forever. Barely anybody would bother renaming their scripts and modules changing extensions – so, .pm6, and .p6, and alikes would stick around.

One things I know for sure: this proposal must be the last of its kind. This discussion itself brings in more harm then any name attached to the language.

[nxadm]

Here is what I mean by that. Maybe we must do what was supposed to be done for Raku? Make it _Perl 6 Camelia_ and just give it a chance. If over time _Camelia_ takes over then this is how things are supposed to be. And if not – _Perl 6_ will thrive forever.

If there is something I would oppose, is going for a do-over of a (well intended) failure. Rename and let both languages grow or, just do nothing acknowledge the consequences. But rehashing the same discussion every six months and picking non-solutions hasn't worked for many years, being narratives of broken analogies ("sister languages) or something that completely neglects to work on the problem ("a name with Perl in it").

@zoffixznet's alias plan made sense then because it was meant as a first step for a renaming when people's mind weren't open yet to the idea. Listening to the Perl 5 Pumpkin's talk at TPC-USA made one thing very clear for me: the Perl 5 people are moving on, and Perl 6 is not part of the roadmap.

[tony-o]

@nxadm the alias was a worst of both worlds compromise. We need to either rename the lang or stop discussing it, the cyclical [re]discussion is most of the damage at this point.

@tadzik's suggestion for a name (if we rename) lgtm but, whatever, not like I'm going to stop contributing either way.

[kentfredric]

I'm not raising any objections, however, 2 things to consider:

1. Camelia is usually spelt with 2 "L"'s (with only one notable exception in wikipedia), not 1, and this could potentially be a place for repeated and predictable mistakes.
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camellia_%28cipher%29

[JJ]

Well, the single l can be our brand...

[thoughtstream]

I'm long on the record as being in favour of a different name.

And I have no particular objection to the name _"Camelia"_, which has good
searchability and strong associations with both Perl 5 and Perl 6.

But I'm nervous about voting on this proposal without at least a
brief discussion on the actual name we choose. It feels like we're
being offered a either/or choice: _"Perl 6"_ or _"Camelia"_,
without any consideration of other possibilities.

I don't mean to suggest that Liz hasn't considered those other possibilities,
or that there haven't been similar discussions previously, or that Liz's point
about starting from scratch with some other name isn't very well made.
And I certainly understand the psychological benefits of making this a simple
fait accompli.

But if this change is really happening, and if this discussion is going to
decide that, and if this language really is to be a hundred-year language,
then I still feel we ought to at least consider some alternatives as part of
this conversation. As, indeed, several other contributors have already done.

In particular, I think we need to discuss whether _"Raku"_, the
alternative name Larry proposed, is a viable possibility. It is
substantially shorter than _"Camelia"_ (and hits the 4-character sweet
spot), it's slightly more searchable, has pleasant associations of
"comfort" or "ease" in its original Japanese, in which language it
even looks a litte like our butterfly mascot: 楽. It also makes the
"Rakudo" compiler mean "The Way of Raku". On the other hand, Google
Translate claims "raku" means "sheep" in various African dialects,
"rags" in yet another, and "cancer" in Serbian. :-(

I fully agree that _"Rakudo"_ itself is out-of-bounds, as it's already
firmly established as the name of the pre-eminent compiler for the language,
and we definitely want to preserve the linguistic distinction between
the language and its various implementations.

Liz also mentioned an alias I have previously used when teaching
Perl 6: _"Albus"_. This is not Harry Potter reference (though the
"World's Greatest Wizard" association doesn't necessary hurt), but rather
it's the Latin word for a pearl (and also means "clean" or "shiny"
or "auspicious"). It's also shorter than _"Camelia"_, more searchable
than either "_Camelia"_ or _"Raku"_, and has no negative connations that
I can find in other languages. On the other hand, there that "kindly,
old, slightly loopy eccentric" association from Harry Potter as well.

Another name I have previously suggested is _"Zeta"_, which is the sixth
letter of the modern Greek alphabet, and also the name in many European
dialects of the letter 'Z': a fitting association for the "ultimate
programming language". Curiously, its numerical value in Greek is 7
(it was the seventh letter in Ancient Greek), but maybe that covers us
going forward too? It's short, has no negative linguistic associations,
but it's not especially searchable (being swamped by the Riemann Zeta
Function). It has a cool looking symbol (ζ), which we could claim was
pronounced "The Language Formerly Known As Perl 6". There's a slight
clash with the 1980s ZetaLisp programming language...though everyone who
cares about that is probably now either retired or insane. ;-)

There have been numerous other suggestions as well, of course.
I'm not for a moment suggesting that we particularly need to
debate all (or even many) of them, nor ultimately to choose anything
other than _"Camelia"_. I just think that we ought to consider the
possibilities before we make so significant a change. Not my suggestions
especially, but at very least Larry's preferred alternative of _"Raku"_.

After all, imagine if _"Amazon"_ had persisted with Bezos' first choice of
_"Cadabra"_, if _"Friends"_ had gone with the pitched title of _"Insomnia Cafe"_,
if _"Black Sabbath"_ had stuck with their original _"The Polka Tulk Blues Band"_,
or if _"Brexit"_ had remained _"TaxAvoidancexit"_, or _"Bigotrentrance"_, or
_"To(r)yStory"_, or _"ShortingThePound"_, or _"DroolBrittania"_?

Seriously, though, rebranding and relaunching this 20-year project is a huge
opportunity...and risk. And, in this case, a vastly emotional and emotive
one as well. We're on the right course, in my opinion, but should take
all the time we need, and examine all the possibilities we can,
to ensure we get it right.

[FCO]

I like ofun

_{Sent with GitHawk}

[nxadm]

I think a core part of @lizmat 's proposal (and the course of action proposed by @AlexDaniel) is short-cutting a hypothetical never-ending discussion about the name before a decision is taken on the principle. She plays it safe and provides a default choice in case we're paralyzed and stuck in choice discussion for ever. This way she acknowledges people that would be OK for renaming if most people agree, but are allergic to the expected bikeshedding and the corresponding stress and waste of energy.

I am not fond of the Camelia name myself because I am one of those people that dislike the mascot, but even then the name it's a good solution the problem in my eyes. @lizmat 's talk makes it also very clear she's OK with other names. So I would suggest, like @AlexDaniel, to try not converting this thread in a premature search of the best name (we've have had plenty of those in the past). Let's agree (or disagree) on the principle. So if you're OK with a rename, but object to the name (of have reservation), just state your stand and add a note that you would prefer further discussion on the specific choice.

[JJ]

A renaming debate is fun and great. But unfortunately, we've been there.
The choice of Camelia is simple: search for camelia and language already
takes us to Perl 6 pages. We can also keep the logo. And it's 7 characters
long, 6-ish. So while ofun and all the others have their merits, I prefer
Camelia

El vie., 9 ago. 2019 9:18, Fernando Correa de Oliveira <
[email protected]> escribió:

I like ofun

Sent with GitHawk http://githawk.com

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAAAD5F67KWPYDGAVWUDDGLQDUD2BA5CNFSM4IKGGHZ2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD35WZWY#issuecomment-519793883,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAAD5HRT55YGP2HGUK5YR3QDUD2BANCNFSM4IKGGHZQ
.

[nige123]

Honest brands are good. An honest brand means clearer communication, trust and authenticity.

The honest truth is Perl 6 is a dialect of Perl - and that's something not to be embarrassed about. I'd like to keep all those good Perlish associations (e.g., Larry, TMTOWTDI, whipupitude, expressivity, practicality etc) and retain Perl in the description of the language.

For example:

• camelia is a Perl dialect optimised to make programming fun.
• ofun is a Perl dialect optimised to make programming fun.
• raku is a Perl dialect optimised to make programming fun.

I prefer ofun as it 'runs deep' in Perl 6 history and sums up what it _feels_ like to use the language and it's slightly irreverent towards computational complexity - this is a language for humans first and computers second.

Edit:

ofun works well in combination with Camilia the butterfly mascot. The strong sounding raku is less of a match.

ofun takes less time to type than python, ocaml or go run.

Update:

After considering some of the thoughtful comments below - I've changed my mind regarding ofun and now prefer raku.

[duncand]

I would be quite happy with the name "Camelia", and I like it more than most other suggestions.

For anyone saying that's too long a name, I strongly disagree. This is only 7 characters and a single word, it is extremely easy to type and to say. I think trying to get under 6 characters such as @nige123 hopes for would dismiss too many good options without any gain.

[duncand]

Perl 5 should just do what Java did early on when Java 1.2 was called Java 2, and so on.

Call the next major release Perl version 32, and so on.

[nxadm]

The honest truth is Perl 6 is a dialect of Perl

No, it isn't by any definition of dialect (or sociolect).

[kentfredric]

Well, if I get out my shoehorn, I could claim that the "ia" in "Camelia" is an italian collective pluralization suffix, making it a term to describe a group of camels.

There's lots of wordplay potential here, maybe somebody wants to make a machine-learning system in it, and they can call it "CamelAI", which is ... just camelia with the last 2 letters transposed.

or if "Brexit" had remained "TaxAvoidancexit", or "Bigotrentrance", or
"To(r)yStory", or "ShortingThePound", or "DroolBrittania"?

Don't be daft, the point of brexit was to eschew "remaining".

The honest truth is Perl 6 is a dialect of Perl

Well, English is a dialect of Anglo Saxon, but they've diverged sufficiently that we give them their own names now because its less confusing, and even though it has that heritage, the intermingling and divergence makes them rather .... visually distinct.

But I don't have a dromedary or a bactrian in this race, so please take my thoughts on their own merits, disregard who said them.

[nige123]

The honest truth is Perl 6 is a dialect of Perl

No, it isn't by any definition of dialect (or sociolect).

The Oxford definition is:

noun

1 A particular form of a language which is peculiar to a specific region or social group.
‘the Lancashire dialect seemed like a foreign language’

1.1 Computing 
      A particular version of a programming language.

1.1 seems apt to me.

[kentfredric]

A particular version of a programming language.

Its long been determined that "Perl 6" is not really "a version" of the same language "Perl 5" is, official terminology is they're "sister languages". So maybe an analogy would be English vs German. They share common ancestry via its Saxon roots, but calling one a "version of" or "dialect of" the other is kinda nonsensical.

[samcv]

I will continue to use Perl 6 and Perl 5 no matter what they are called. But I think there is strength in having a unified message.

It would be very symbolic if Perl 5 announced the next release being 32, at the same time Perl 6 is now "Camelia". This is a much stronger message to the world than one language unilaterally changing their name. There is strength in showing that Perl 5 is still being developed, and strength in showing that Perl 6 is now taking flight (pun intended) as "Camelia".

[kentfredric]

It would be very symbolic if Perl 5 announced the next release being 32, at the same time Perl 6 is now "Camelia".

That really depends on who you talk to. To some, it would just be further evidence that there's something broken in Perl development, and that people using it are nuts.

Just like some people heaped praise at PHP for jumping right to PHP7, while others just held their face in their hands and incorporated it with their mental arsenal of "things PHP does wrong".

For many people, these repeated grasps to stay relevant are just alienating the established user base, while not materially attracting new blood.

edit: Did I mention that every time people talk about JDK, they have to work out whether to say "1.x" or "x", and sometimes they have to mention both, just to avoid confusion? It hasn't changed its versioning scheme, its just created a secondary scheme which maps to the other in effective perpetuity. And then there's projects liked "icedtea" which have yet another version scheme. It's such a mess.

[nxadm]

1.1 Computing
A particular version of a programming language.
```

1.1 seems apt to me.

"Version" is pretty much the core of the problem we face.

Perl 6 is not the newer version of Perl 5 while the world think it is.

[nige123]

That's why dialect is a good word. It does not imply any numerical supremacy as 'version' sometimes does (i.e., 5 -> 6).

I'd suggest putting all three names to the vote: camelia, raku and ofun (Larry liked this too).

[JJ]

El vie., 9 ago. 2019 a las 12:19, Nigel Hamilton ([e-mail])
escribió:

That's why dialect is a good word. It does not imply any numerical
supremacy as 'version' sometimes does (i.e., 5 -> 6).

I'd suggest putting all three names to the vote: camelia, raku and
ofun (Larry liked this too
https://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/perl6?date=2018-10-25#l655).

I'm sorry, but the issue here is camelia vs !camelia. If you don't like
camelia, opt for !camelia.

[lizmat]

I think I've said what I wanted to say in this proposal.

People have pointed out that I may have disregarded the "Raku" option in this. For the record, I have. I decided not to use that in this proposal because it is already tainted with "Perl", and in a way, getting away from the brand 'Perl' is what we're trying to achieve.

Having said that, I would also like to go on record that I will not be opposing the use of "Raku", should that be the outcome of this issue. I would be opposed opening up the naming discussion more generally yet again. In code:

my $preference = %( Camelia => 100, Raku => 0 ){$name} // -100

[JJ]

El vie., 9 ago. 2019 a las 13:14, Elizabeth Mattijsen (<
[email protected]>) escribió:

I think I've said what I wanted to say in this proposal.

People have pointed out that I may have disregarded the "raku" option in
this. For the record, I have. I decided not to use that in this proposal
because it is already tainted with "Perl", and in a way, getting away from
the brand 'Perl' is what we're trying to achieve.

Having said that, I would also like to go on record that I will not be
opposing the use of "raku", should that be the outcome of this issue. I
would be opposed opening up the naming discussion more generally yet
again. In code:

my $preference = %( Camelia => 100, raku => 0 ){$name} // -100

Sorry, but I couldn't help but nitpick on this:

say %( Camelia => 100, raku => 0 ).Mix.roll( 10 );

(Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia Camelia

Camelia)

[neilb]

Perl 5 and Perl 6 have been like conjoined sisters, and being conjoined typically holds back the development of both siblings. It's (well past) time to pull them apart so they can have separate identities, while remaining related.

This will make me happy, but more than that: greatly relieved.

We may not recover from all the damage that the naming issue has done, but we'd at least be able to try.

[patrickbkr]

The raku alias did go public, resulting in some people starting to use the name raku (that's just what the alias announcement proposed). E. g. @nxadm's Rakudo packages contain raku, rakudo and perl6 executables. I would say the usage of the raku alias is not high enough to justify a 'we should not rename to something else, because then we have a third name out there' stance, but it should be thought about.

In every case we need to communicate clearly what happens to the raku alias, if we decide to not rename or decide to rename to something else.

[domm]

I think establishing a new name for Perl 6 (and maybe at the same time bumping Perl 5 to "Perl, version 32") is a good idea.

Of course (as we see in this discussion) deciding on a new name is rather hard. As we probably don't want to switch the name again, some work should go into finding this name.

IMO an ideal solution would be to decide if there should be a renaming (basically this issue), and if yes, start a process to find a good name, i.e. brainstorming; checking if the candidates are not offensive (in various languages) (and also weed out "PerlyMcPerlFace" et.al.); are easy to search, pronounce and type; collect feedback from the community and probably have a public vote (using Instant Runoff Voting, reducing the options to two or three; and finally have a commitee decide on the name (or even let the community decide on the name)

But if this process is deemed to complex or wobbly (who is allowed to vote? how can we avoid sock pupptes / bandwagon effects, ..), I'd rather switch to Camelia than do nothing.

[eritain]

"Camelia" is a _good enough name,_ by which I mean it is noticeably better than the protracted nightmare of the Perl Nomenclature Wars. That, for me, is the principal issue.

Thought experiment: If the language had always been "Camelia," and all the other names had suddenly been proposed this week, what would your reaction be, on a scale from "oh sweet mercy, we're finally talking about this" to "great idea, please debate names in my lovely bikeshed, which locks from the outside and inexplicably reeks of kerosene"?

"Camelia" happens to be my favorite of the names on offer, but even if it weren't, I'd have to ask, "Is the proposed name _satisfactory_ to a good majority of the stakeholders? Could most people _get to like it_ eventually?"

Doesn't have to be the perfect name. Doesn't have to be _beloved_ by a majority. Doesn't have to make the top quintile pronunciation speed in the 23 most widely used phonologies, hail Eris. No other property of a naming or aliasing proposal that I can imagine is half as valuable, IMO, as finally. getting. it. done.

I believe "Camelia" is majority acceptable, or could get there easily. I believe few other names of which we are now aware, or could soon be aware, clear that standard. I believe that "Camelia" would clear it by a wider margin in any case.

It's probably reasonable to wait a couple more days to see if anyone can propose a name competitive with "Camelia" on that criterion. Then do a round of approval voting and see if I'm right. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow, and we can go ahead with tuning the weights for the 42 criteria to optimize the proposals for the process of selecting the committee to brainstorm names, or whatever fresh hell. But do the simple approval vote first.

("Perl 32" is an excellent companion proposal to "Camelia" and I hope the 5 cabal will consider it seriously.)

[pistacchio]

Hi. I’m an outsider in the Perl6 community, but I’ve been following its development constantly for the past four or so years and I’m looking forward to use it in some personal project.

Few days ago I wrote a post on the Perl6 Facebook group suggesting some marketing actions to promote the usage of the language and I didn’t go as far as proposing the name change, but since it’s been proposed here by Liz, I salute it as a tremendous opportunity to start afresh and decide from scratch a new marketing strategy to make the programming community interested in Perl6.

Now, I think Camelia is a terrible name.
The hard job to be done here is to abstract yourself from your own knowledge and sentimental investment with the language and pretend you’re the average guy on r/programming that is hearing about the language for the first.

The first question to ask is: what does the marketing of Perl6 want to communicate? What are the key “feelings” that one wants to be associated with it?
Because “Camelia” is “cute” and “gentle”, especially when associated with the Camelia logo. Sadly, outside the Perl6 community, the ongoing feeling associated with Perl6 is “it’s a joke” and having as a logo a smiling, colorful butterfly that seems to have been drawn in the ‘90s by a 11 year old kid on MS Paint doesn’t help.

I strongly feel like both the name “Camelia” and the Camelia logo need to go away, because nobody wants to invest its time in something he perceives as a “joke language” and nobody would ever choose a language because it’s “gentle”.

As other pointed out, Camelia is also a too long name. Pick some of the most popular languages nowadays: C, C++, Rust, Go, Java, Ruby. Shot names, even one or two letters. If they’re too long like JavaScript they get shortened down as JS.

Also, Camelia, with the “C” and the “ML” in the name could confuse someone into thinking that’s its a language of the ML family like Ocaml.

It would be interesting to look at some survey like “What are the most sought out programming language characteristics” and let them inspire the choice of the name, but I’m pretty sure that “cutenesses” or “gentleness” are not there. People wants languages to be “fast”, “reliable”, “mature”, “safe”. Camelia doesn’t convey any of that.

On the other hand, “Raku” is a fantastic name. The shortness of the name inspires the fastness of the language. “Strong” and “R” and “K” letters inspires powerfulness in the language, in to the soft letters “M” and “L” in Camelia.

It also recalls the Japanese culture with many strong positive associations within the “nerdish” programming community thanks to manga, anime, videogames. Together with a new logo Raku logo that would strongen the association with such culture, it would recall terms like “zen” and “samurai” to promote a language that is both “wise” and “powerful”.

I don’t have my computer at hand so I can’t work on a proposal right now, but as a Raku logo, a patched grey vase with golden joints and the Raku text written with a font that recalls the Japanese writing would be great. Or such vase broken and re-joined in four parts and the four letters that make the “Raku” name in the four patches.

Another thing that I think needs to be corrected (again, by putting ourselves in the shoes of someone knowing nothing about the language”) in preparing the Perl6 site for re-launching is getting rid of any name that is not strictly the new name of the language (being Camelia, or Raku or whatever). I know that for people involved for years in the development of the language “Perl”, “Camelia”, “Raku”, “Rakudo”, “MoarVm” all make sense, but I’ve never heard of the language and I’m on the main language site, I only want to see what the language looks like at a glance, a QuickStart guide and a big “Download Camelia” or “Download Raku” button. As of now, I land on the Perl6 site and I see a “Download Rakudo” button. I know it makes sense if you already know the Perl6 language history and ecosystem, but it doesn’t make the slightest sense for any new come and it’s only a source of avoidable early confusion.

Just my two cents.

[borisdaeppen]

Kind of a response, from "outsider" to "outsider"

On Naming in General and Renaming of Perl6 in Particular

Liz' perl6-naming-issue has got a lot of traction on reddit and other sites.

A lot of people gave their opinion. Some mention why certain names are good and certain are not.

I feel like some important facts about the nature of things have not been mentioned yet.
At least not in this new iteration on the topic.
I briefly like to address some realities about naming.

Names are Dialectic

Names do have a property which some people (maybe especially 'Programmers') may not like:
It isn't possible to control a name!

Why is that?

Names are dialectic in nature: meaning they engage with you as you engage with them.

If you name something, the name may influence the thing, but the thing may also influence the name!
How the end result will be perceived may vary heavily in space and time, meaning locations and generations.

• A "bad" name can be a burden for a good person or product

but also:

• A good person or product can clean up a "bad" name (or define its meaning in the first place)

Also: People will perceive, use and misuse a name as they see fit!
Names are part of human language and humans tend to be very creative with it.
You can not foresee what will happen to a name.
You can just try to avoid some obvious pitfalls.

Ethymology and Symbolics

The meaning of a name can also be drawn from its historical context or from current usage and analogies.
Like 'Python' is a snake meaning X and 'Ruby' is a crystal meaning Y.

But one need to understand that this has just a very small to no importance for most people.

Nobody refers to 'Perl' as a 'Pearl', which actually is its etymological and symbolical origin.
The Implementation and Community has influenced the name 'Perl' so heavily that it created it's own meaning!

Renaming of Perl6

When we talk about the name 'Perl6' we have one objective problem:

• People are angry/confused because of the version, the unclear distinction, etc.

This does not make 'Perl6' a bad name per se, but it is a good reason to change the name.

Is Camelia a 'good' name for Perl6?

Again, if you 'like' it now or will in the future, is subject to past and future dialectics, which you can't control.

What we can say now:

• The name is unique and distinctive, both in meaning and searchability
• It lets room for a lot of creativity in the feature (abbreviations, wordplays, etc)
• It is not a obviously bad name

(They same probably applies to 'Raku'. It is not an argument for or against a specific name I'm trying to make here)

Who should give a Name?

I'd say it is as with children.
Those who put their effort in (parents), give the name.
For Perl6, this is the developers of Perl6.

People who claim 'outsider' perspective don't 'actually' represent the outside perspective, but merely their own.
And they surely can't foresee neither, how the dialectics will play out in the future.

Thanks for reading

I hope this helps taking the 'fear' of names from some of you.

original source for this text, dicussion thread

Boris, in a train, 2019-08-10

(editet for grammar and minor details, 2019-08-12)

[uzluisf]

NOTE: As far as I'm concerned, I'm an outsider to the Perl 6 community relative to other community members who's been involved far longer than I and in a more direct and impactful way. I understand that we humans aren't infallible and I might be missing some facts that are crystal clear to other community members (e.g., core developers). Thus, you should take the following with a grain salt.

If we must agree on something, it's that this recurrent language name issue should be stopped and I think this is the appropriate time to be done with it once and for all. It doesn't look good on the community. If we cannot even agree in the name of the language, what message does than send to people outside the community?

In the following paragraphs, I'll be pitching for Raku but even if Camelia (or other name is chosen) it'll be a win-win for the community. I understand we must always make compromises and realistically speaking, I don't think most people (including myself) in this comment section have that much of a stake in the final decision. However, I trust the people in the list added by @AlexDaniel will make the right (well, the most appropriate) decision in this particular situation.

This is probably redundant but I don't use/like Perl 6 because of its name but due to what Perl 6 is and stands for.

---

Kudos to Liz for this proposal which represents a great opportunity to start afresh as stated by @pistacchio.

That being said, I'm wondering why Raku isn't a viable and obvious choice for the language name. Liz provides several reasons why Camelia is the obvious choice and the following are my refutations to those reasons:

the search term "camelia programming language" already brings you to the right place.

I don't think this is a big deal because most people when looking for a programming language in a search engine probably appends some combination of the words programming and language to their searches. For instance, searching [1] for crystal doesn't bring up any relevant information as far as the Crystal programming language is concerned. However, searching for crystal programming, for example, gives you relevant results with the first one being a link to the language website. The same applies to raku. This is not the case for C, Perl 6, Ruby, Rust, etc. Searching for these names will give you relevant information about these languages, if only for the amount of time these names have been in the open and used in documentation, forums, articles, blogs, videos, etc. However, this is to expected since raku became an alias for Perl 6 a few months ago and even after then, the name hasn't been used prominently aside from few mentions on the glossary. Thus, we shouldn't expect it to be ranked first in search results as it's been barely promoted/embraced/used.

the logo / mascot would not need changing: it's just that it now also becomes the actual name of the programming language.

At first glance, Camelia (the mascot) doesn't have that much of relationship with Perl 6. Certainly, if you read about it on Wikipedia or you're greeted by it on the Perl 6 homepage, you might be begin to associate Camelia with Perl 6. However, for someone in the wild who's never heard about Perl 6, Camelia is only a cute and quirky drawing of a butterfly. Thus, I don't think the logo needs to change even if a language name, other than Camelia, is chosen. I know many people don't like the logo (I'm sad to admit it but at first, I was in that camp too) but I'll daresay Camelia is sort of an acquired taste. And if the bright colors are the problem, Zoffix created different tone-down variants of the logo. I myself created another variant with darker and softer colors and with what I consider a less squiggly and more inviting smile ;-).

"Camelia" in its name, still carries something Perlish inside of it.

I'm unfortunately missing the point on this one ("Camelia"?!). Sorry :-(!

The concept of "Camelia" being an implementation of a specification in "roast", still stands. The alternative, to use "Rakudo" as the name of the language, would cause confusion with the name being used to indicate an implementation, and would endanger the separation between specification and implementation.

I understand this but wouldn't the same apply to Raku?! And as Liz and others have indicated, I think "Rakudo" shouldn't be considered as a candidate for the name of the language. This would blur, confuse and endanger the "separation between specification and implementation", especially when new implementations hopefully come out.

Choosing yet another name, such as Albus, would mean having to start from scratch with marketing and getting the name out there. Hence my preference for a known name such as "Camelia".

To some extent the same applies to Raku. For instance, with the 6.d release announcement Zoffix created beautiful brochures which got the name out there and sprang multiple discussions. Furthermore, many people who are somehow involved with the community stated they would start using Raku (or Raku Perl 6). Thus, there was some expectation that Raku could possibly phase out the name Perl 6 in the long run "through its sheer amount of use". Anecdotally, many times I've come across some community members in Reddit (/r/programminglanguages, /r/perl6, /r/perl, /r/programming, etc.) and in HackerNews using Raku to refer to Perl 6. Thus the word is already out there that the language is also referred to as Raku.

The "Camelia" logo is still copyright Larry Wall, so it would allow Larry to still be connected to one of the programming languages that he helped get into the world.

I honestly think that even if the language was logo-less, Larry would still be connected to the language. After all, the language is infused with his spirit and wisdom all over the place. I understand where Liz is coming from but a similar argument could be pitched for Raku too. Larry didn't just choose Raku in a whim. After Zoffix's proposal, Larry went away from the keyboard and many people wondered what would happen with the request. I honestly thought nothing would come out of it. However, Larry came back to #perl6 and had a brainstorming section with other community members about the new alias. By the way, I'm willing to believe that Larry was already set on Raku. Few of the things he liked about it were: the name's short (only 4 letters), connection with Raku pottery (which is"imperfect but sophisticated"), there isn't an existing "raku" command (at least that Linux Mint he admitted. I myself never heard of Raku before) and it can be read as "rock you". @nige123 provides a few other criteria for a language name that Raku seems to meet.

All that being said, I don't know what would be the sentiment towards promoting Raku from an alias to an official name. Larry envisioned Raku as a stage name but I think that was only due to the scope of the then proposal. Thus, I don't see any problem for it being promoted as the official name of the language. Some people are already aware of it, use it alone (Raku instead of Raku Perl 6 as mentioned in the 6.d release), it doesn't carry that much linguistic baggage, it's the name for some type of beautiful Japanese pottery, it also means "enjoyment" (according to WP) which further strengthens its relationship with ofun, it commands uniqueness, reliability, etc. as emphasized by @pistacchio, etc. Therefore, what's not to like about it?!

---

[1] Searches were done on DuckDuckGo and Startpage. Mileage may vary.

---

Edit:

I'm for keeping the Camelia logo but I went ahead and created a Raku logo. Suggestions are welcome.

[tbrowder]

I'm happy with whatever the community decides (although I like "raku" for a new name, and I would keep Camelia as the mascot/logo).

However, in all the turmoil and changes in superstructure a name change will entail, one thing that bothers me is our major investment in cpan--how will that relationship change or be handled?

[melezhik]

Hi! My 2 cents in this historical event.

Camelia seems pretty and beautiful as a name itself. However I find some difficulties with it's practicalness. What should we name the interpreter? Camelia seems too long to type. We need to think of better shortcuts. What should we use as a file extensions? cm, cl ? Looks good for me, though might be already reserved by other languages.

Raku looks more advantageous in the context of the mentioned points. It's way too shorter and almost without hassle could be used straight away:

raku - interpreter
rk - extension

As a bottom line:

Camelia is something precious, gentle, sophisticated and a bit impractical

Raku is straightforward, direct and pragmatical if not to say rough.

Which way we go?

Name determines the future.

All opinions are mine.

Thank you.

[Scimon]

I am fine with renaming the language as long as we keep a solid friendly and working relationship with the Perl Foundation. As tbrowder mentions above losing the usage of CPAN would be an issue. Also if we lost the ability to fun grants because "Camelia / Raku / A.N. Other isn't Perl" then we'd lose a lot of potential for growth.

I know the naming thing annoys a lot of the hardcore Perl 5 community and by changing it we go a long way to mollifying that but I worry that some may also take it as an excuse to try and sever all ties.

(Sorry for the delay was in Scotland last week mostly incommunicado).

[ab5tract]

I am fine with renaming the language as long as we keep a solid friendly and working relationship with the Perl Foundation. As tbrowder mentions above losing the usage of CPAN would be an issue. Also if we lost the ability to fun grants because "Camelia / Raku / A.N. Other isn't Perl" then we'd lose a lot of potential for growth.

I know the naming thing annoys a lot of the hardcore Perl 5 community and by changing it we go a long way to mollifying that but I worry that some may also take it as an excuse to try and sever all ties.

(Sorry for the delay was in Scotland last week mostly incommunicado).

I think this is a valid consideration. In fact, it was the argument that Wendy posted that made me change my mind about supporting the Raku stage name proposal last time we went through the Name Change Carnival.

However, I think that the communities should naturally diverge and overlap only as much as occurs naturally over the course of the next few years. If the name change generates enough good will with the Perl 5 community that still hates Perl 6 to let them start to heal, then maybe they will even give the current implementation a second look.

I've talked to p5p members whose main objection to giving Perl 6 a fair chance remains the name issue. I'd like to see the look on their face if they were finally to give it a shake, but only as Raku. Somehow I am sure that they would fall in love. Wouldn't it be better to come back to sharing grant funding boards and conferences after we allow some time and space for that to happen?

As it stands, the bottom line from a language adoption perspective is that both Perl 5 and Perl 6 need to make it on their own merits in this world. I think they can both be better siblings to each other by spending some time developing themselves outside of previous unhealthy relationship patterns, even if those relationships have been previously vital for survival.

In terms of naming choice, personally I side more with the 'Raku' corner of the debate. It already has momentum, it's a Japanese word and Perl 6 has a lot of contributing modules from Japan. And what seals it for me is the Perlish-ness of "raku _do_" being the command-line invocation for running Raku code. I appreciate the concern about multiple implementations but considering the time it took to get the first one right, giving that too much weight is premature optimization at this point.

That said: I love that damn butterfly! No one can ever stop me from loving and using that logo. However, there is even precedence for the multi-logo lifestyle in Perl's history: the onion and the camel were both interchangeable symbols in Perl's heyday. Who wants to take a stab at a raku glazed rendition of Camelia? A silhouette on a cup, perhaps? Or maybe a ceramic rendition of a butterfly, fired with all the colors of Camelia?

[pjlsergeant]

I am fine with renaming the language as long as we keep a solid friendly and working relationship with the Perl Foundation @scimon

In a more corporate world, one tends to say something like “Foobar, a Megacorp company”. One might end up with “Camelia, a Perl Foundation Language” or something

[hythm7]

I think this is the right time to fix the name issue once and for all. I like all suggested names Camelia, Raku and ofun, and if these are the only options, I hope it will be Raku due to the reasons mentioned in the comments above, particularly Raku & Rakudo looks related and complement each other.

I also want to say that I do love Camelia mascot and I hope that the name change won't affect the Camelia mascot in anyway.

[DataKinds]

Nothing new to add to this discussion, but my $0.02 go towards naming the language Raku. It's short, memorable, sounds similar to Rakudo, nice to say out loud, and easy to type.

[patrickbkr]

@AlexDaniel May I propose we phase this discussion into two separate ones:

1. Do we rename? How? What does that mean? (the original intent of this issue)
2. Which name?

Maybe just create a separate problem-solving issue and continue the "Which name?" discussion there. That way the discussion does not fade into a naming discussion as is happening now and we have more incentive to discuss the harder / less opinionated topics.

[JJ]

@patzim I don't think the intent of this issue was to start all over again the naming debate. @lizmat suggested a new name, and we can take it or leave it. If we take it, fine, if we leave it, we could start yet over again the naming debate or just continue calling it Perl 6 and have another two years of naming proposal, losing yet another window of opportunity.
So I don't really think we should open two different issues. Let's accept, or not, @lizmat proposal, and then we take it from there.
Just for the record, I really really really think we should accept camelia as the new name of the implementation of the language. I love it, it's original:

• 7 letters! One letter more than the longest language on record, reflecting the issue that Camelia has everything and the kitchen sink!
• Nice name for followers! (Either Cameliers or Cameleers)
• cml command line is no longer used https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_Menu_Language!
• We can use cmlia as an extension! (and keep using p6, pl6 and so on, of course)

Also, this discussion is starting to go meta in many unexpected ways. When that happens, it's about time we start to resolve it...

[patrickbkr]

This post is a first try to make the idea of a rename more concrete and substantial. This helps me a lot to get a feel for what we are talking about and where the difficulties may be.
This is just a first idea of what I imagine a rename could look like. Please discuss / correct as you see fit.

I'll be using the name _Whatever_ as the imaginary new name. This is a placeholder and not intended as a proposal or implicit support of any name!

Technical

• We register a domain _whatever-lang.org_
• The domain _perl6.org_ redirects with 301 to _whatever-lang.org_
• The _whatever-lang.org_ website will be a copy of _perl6.org_. We don't change the logo and color scheme. On the start page we add a paragraph or similar reading explaining the rename.
• The build system is adapted to create _whatever_ executables next to the current _perl6_ executable. After a deprecation cycle the _perl6_ executables will no longer be built. Packagers are encouraged to follow suit.
• We promote a new file extension of _.wt_ for scripts and _.wm_ for modules and either gradually or in one big sweep change the extensions of the roast and rakudo repositories.
• We make sure the module loader recognizes and accepts the following extensions: _.pm6_, _.pm_, _.wm_. Support for _.pm6_ and _.pm_ extensions will never be dropped. (see src/core/CompUnit/Repository/FileSystem.pm6 and tools/lib/NQP/Config/Rakudo.pm)
• The Wikipedia page Perl 6 will be renamed to Whatever_(programming_language) and a forward added. Again, we add in the first paragraph a sentence mentioning the rename (and probably a paragraph under _history_).
• We'll contact _Stackoverflow_ and _Reddit_ adminitrators of how to best deal with respective topics / tags on their sites and act accordingly.
• Third party projects we need need to be changed:
  
  
  
  • Travis perl6 configuration
  
  
  • Circle CI?
  
  
  • AppVeyor?
  
  
  • rakudobrew
  
  
  • online evaluators
    
    
    
    
    
    • repl.it
    
    
    
    • glot.io
    
    
    
    • tio.run
    
    
    
  
  
  • Various editor syntax highlighting packages ( I think there is some list in a ticket about IDE/editor support)
    
    
    
    
    
    • Atom
    
    
    
    • Visual Studio Code
    
    
    
    • Vim
    
    
    
    • Emacs
    
    
    
    • KDE/Kate
    
    
    
  
  

Marketing / Communication

• We try to make the most of the rename marketing wise. We turn the rename into an event with an as big as possible bang factor.
• We try to work against some of the long standing stereotypes of Perl 6.
  
  
  
  • Perl 6 is slow: Present some performance comparisons. Younger benchmarks are not grave for Perl 6 anymore, be vocal about that. Don't lie, but be striking and catchy enough to be a quick counter to the striking and uninformed: "Perl 6? That's unusable because it's slow." - "That's not true anymore, look at _www.whatever-lang.org_, they have a chart that shows it's not anymore!"
  
  
  • No one uses Perl 6: Provide a list of companies that use Whatever. There are some, we need to inquiry those whether we are allowed to use their name and logo. If we get only few, try to write up a case studies what the individual projects actually were.
  
  
• Combine the rename with a rakudo release so the rename is not hanging in the air. That'd be the first release under the new name. Be clear that this release now contains/builds _whatever_ executables as well as the old _perl6_ executables. Provide binary packages for the three major platforms.
• Try to get a brochure prepared that promotes _Whatever_ under the new name. Do we have designer competence in the community? Do we need to pay for a designer? Where does the money come from? @zoffixznet did a good job creating marketing materials. (also see the perl6/marketing repo)
• Try to get some articles published in printed and online media. @lichtkind @moritz maybe an article for Heise or similar? @lizmat opensource.com?
• Contact TPF and strive for a solution that allows _Whatever_ to stay under the TPF umbrella as a _language with a Perl spirit_. Hopefully this will prevent any hindrance in _Whatever_ to use the CPAN ecosystem, take part in TPF grants and similar. Get TPF to publish a post that promotes the rename and clarifies the new/old relation of _Whatever_ to the TPF.

Open questions

Do we actually want to leave the color scheme of the websites and logo unchanged? Keeping them keeps us recognizable. The rename is a good moment to change them if we want to do so.

_Note: I keep extending this post._

[thoughtstream]

Having spent a great deal of time over the past few days
reading through this discussion, and further reflecting
on this whole issue, I find that:

• I am strongly in favour of the community deciding
  to rename _Perl 6_.

• I am strongly against renaming it _Camelia_,
  and strongly in favour of renaming it _Raku_.

I prefer _Raku_ to _Camelia_ for the following reasons:

1. It’s shorter and more visually distinctive.

2. It’s sounds stronger: two sharp and balanced syllables.

3. It’s less susceptible of misspelling by English speakers.

4. It has a clear and unique two-letter file extension: .rk
   and two plausible module extensions: .rm and .rkm

5. It has positive linguistic associations in its native Japanese:
   _comfortable_ and _easy_.

6. It has a more subtle association with the Perl community’s
   signature camelids: “raku-da” is Japanese for “camel”.

7. It also has highly appropriate cultural associations.
   Something _raku_ is a made thing, a little rough around the edges,
   organic and taking its inspiration from nature, but elusively elegant,
   often revered, and always extremely serviceable.

8. To those without the requisite cultural or linguistic knowledge,
   _Raku_ is simply an easily recognized, easily pronounced,
   unique identifier, without (mis-)associations in most languages.

9. _Raku_ is already strongly publicly associated with the language,
   as its authorized stage name.

   1. Naming the language _Raku_ makes the name of the _Rakudo_ compiler
      project even more apposite. Especially if the interpreter executable
      is renamed to rakudo (by analogy to the shell command sudo,
      or the Vim commands :perldo, :pydo, and :rubydo).

   2. I think mascots should not be named after their languages
      (or, in this case, programming languages after their mascots).
      The _Perl_ camel is “Amelia”, not “Perl”, after all.

   3. Both raku.com and raku.org are currently available.

   4. _Raku_ is currently not trademarked in the relevant categories.

   5. The name _Raku_ is unused in the programming community,
      unlike _Camelia_ (which is the name of a multiplatform OCaml IDE)
      and _Camellia_ (which is a symmetric key block cipher).

   6. If we as a community are to overrule Larry’s long-held
      and consistent preference in this fundamental matter
      of naming, then it seems the most respectful way to do so
      would be with the particular name that Larry has already
      selected as his preferred alternative.

To sum up my position:

• Vote to rename _Perl 6_: strong yes

• Vote to rename _Perl 6_ to _Camelia_: strong no

• Vote to rename _Perl 6_ to _Raku_: strong yes

PS: I also considered the suggested name _Ofun_ at some length,
and while I can appreciate how appropriate and descriptive it is
_within_ the existing community, I think it would be disadvantageous
_beyond_ the existing community. If we are trying to encourage
serious programmers (and their even more sombre decision makers)
to consider our language, then our descriptor should be any of:

• _“A language optimized for power.”_
• _“A language optimized for simplicity.”_
• _“A language optimized for performance.”_
• _“A language optimized for expressiveness.”_
• _“A language optimized for getting your job done.”_

That is is also optimized for fun is a great thing for us developers,
but it’s definitely not a marketing advantage or a commercial
selling point.

[patrickbkr]

@JJ I fully agree that the naming discussion should not happen right now. My point was that it does happen never the less and I don't see it go away. I think it hinders tackling the more difficult topics like:

• Do we want a rename at all?
• What are the pros and cons, risks and opportunities of a rename?
• What do we want our relation to TPF look in the future?
• What about Perl conferences?
• How can the rename help both Perl 6 and Perl 5 move forward?
• What can we do to make sure we find a solution good enough that we'll never have these discussions come up again in the future?
• How can our marketing steps look like? Given we do a rename, we can just as well exploit it marketing wise as good as we can.

Also I think currently we can't just throw a name out there and expect everyone to either approve of that name or oppose a rename. I think we either need to find consensus in some way (@domm has proposed an idea how that could look here) or find consensus that some authority (jnthn?) will get to decide (this is what @zoffixznet tried to do in his Letter to Larry).

[tmtvl]

Dunno if I'm allowed a vote, but in order of preference: 1: Perl 6, 2: Raku, 3: Whatever, 4: Camelia, 5: Python 4.

[Ovid]

Just my two cents:

• Strongly favor a rename and this is the right time to do it.
• I like the name "Camelia", but after reading Damian's reasoning, I now lean towards raku.

As an aside, the performance of the language has now gotten to the point where it's on par with with many other dynamic languages (but not for all features). It's only going to get faster from here. It's a good time to introduce it without it seeming like a ridiculously slow or cumbersome tool.

As an aside: this would also be the time for people to be able to gently learn about the language. The Perl 6 home page has no "Tutorial" link, though it has a Getting Started link, the resulting page of which appears to also not have a "tutorial" link. In fact, introductory links appear on the Download page rather than the "getting started" page. A bit of cleanup here might help.

Something simple like "build your first web app in qr/raku|camelia|ofun/" would be nice here. I think devs often prefer that to "here's how to write a loop".

[AlexDaniel]

@AlexDaniel May I propose we phase this discussion into two separate ones:

1. Do we rename? How? What does that mean? (the original intent of this issue)

2. Which name?

How we are going to choose the name and whether we will be choosing at all will decided by @jnthn.

@jnthn, I think this comment can be a good starting point for the potential PR.

[randyl]

I'm a Perl 5 user who started looking into Perl 6 after brian d foy's _Learning Perl 6_ book was published. I think a rename would be good for the community (both 5 and 6). I prefer Camelia over Raku primarily because of pronounce-ability. When I first heard of the Raku alias, my first thought was "how do you pronounce it?". I didn't have that issue with Camelia. (FWIW, a few months ago in the U.S., there were TV commercials for the website Rakuten.com, and most of the commercials featured people trying to figure out how to pronounce the name.)

I like the power and expressiveness of Perl 6, so regardless of the name decision I'll continue to learn the language. If the name Raku is chosen, the front page of the website should indicate how to pronounce the name, and the cultural/linguistic associations described in @thoughtstream's post.

Finally, I know this is outside of our control, but it would be great if some of the existing Perl 6 books could be republished with the new name (if one is chosen). Having a physical book to study is what encouraged me to learn the language in the first place.

[nige123]

Damian makes a persuasive point regarding the 'sombre decision makers' reaction to ofun .... "we're paying them that much _and_ they're having fun!!?" I can see that could potentially hinder adoption.

I'm swaying back towards raku now.

I like that Larry chose it and it's already embedded in rakudo.

A suggestion is to use the do part like the go command in GoLang (subject to playing nicely with bash etc). It's even shorter to type and allows for different language implementations and toolkits in future:

shell> do hello.rk
shell> do run hello
shell> do test hello.rk
shell> do doc hello.rk
shell> do get https://github.com/nige123/hello

So my preferences/suggestions are:

• call the language raku (ofun is a very close second)
• keep Camilia as the mascot
• consider an implementation agnostic "do" command to invoke it
• keep Perl in the description of the language - don't deny our DNA
• ask the Perl Foundation to register trademarks for "raku" so the Artistic Licence 2.0 still works as intended

[nxadm]

• keep Perl in the description of the language - don't deny our DNA

No one is planning to rewrite history, but one of the reasons for the renaming is making a clear distinction with the historical Perl, aka Perl 5 and getting rid of the "next version" or "sister language" narrative. Each language must gain (or keep) popularity by its own merits.

Are the languages related languages? Of course. It will be stated in the history page. But describing a different language by pointing to the "previous" and "older" Perl 5? Bad idea.

• ask the Perl Foundation to register trademarks for "raku" so the Artistic Licence 2.0 still works as intended

This isn't part of the proposal (everything would stay the same on this issue). This can be decided on its own discussion.

[thoughtstream]

I'm not sure that _Camelia_ is any more intrinsically pronounceable that _Raku_:

• cam-EEL-ya (like the flower?)
• CAM-el-ee-a (like a camel?)
• CAR-meel-yee-a (like the Romanian name?)

And I’m not convinced that it actually matters if people pronounce _Raku_:

• RAHR-koo (like the BBC)
• RAY-koo (like TV’s Troy McClure)
• RACK-oo (like all y‘all)
• LAH-KUH (like the Japanese)

I also note that ambiguities in pronunciation don’t seem to have materially hindered
the success of T style="text-transform:uppercase;vertical-align:-0.5ex;margin-left:-0.1667em;margin-right:-0.125em;line-height:1ex;">eX, or _Kotlin_, or _Clojure_, or _Java_, or _Scala_, or _vi_.

[wbraswell]

@thoughtstream
both raku.com and raku.org have been registered for decades, at least according to whois

[wbraswell]

worth noting that camelia.com and camelia.org are both also already registered

[thoughtstream]

Thanks @wbraswell.
Note, however, that I said _“available”_, not _“unregistered”_.

Both http://raku.com and http://raku.org are parked and available for purchase.
As, indeed, is http://camelia.org.

http://camelia.com (as has been previously noted) is active.

[leonerd]

Perl 5 should just do what Java did early on when Java 1.2 was called Java 2, and so on.

Call the next major release Perl version 32, and so on.

We've been doing that for a while now ;)

$ perl -v

This is perl 5, version 28, subversion 1 (v5.28.1) built for x86_64-linux-gnu-thread-multi(with 61 registered patches, see perl -V for more detail)

[robertlemmen]

_perhaps_ it would have been good to pick a different name from the start, but that's all history now.

But changing it now is far less interesting IMHO: we trade the "Perl 5 vs Perl 6" confusion for one where we need to explain that this Camelia thing is really just a renamed Perl 6...

And, personally, I think loosing the "Perl" would be a great loss indeed, I love Perl and Perlers wether 5 or 6 or whatever!

[virtualsue]

Larry Wall already provided another name for Perl 6. Perl 6 doesn't need yet another name, what it needs is users and applications.

[rehsack]

My first reaction was to reject - since when it's a Perlish language, it should be named that way.

But - I really think Perl5 is dying, for several reasons. Legacy code will run for likely decades without making Perl5 passing away, but it's neither taught at school nor chosen for new projects (the first causes the second) - beside a handful of exceptions (/wave @Tau Station).

When common folk says "Perl" they mean "Perl5" - the ugly, the dying. It would require enormous effort to PR Perl6 is going to be "The Perl" + Perl5 must move out of the place, and I don't see this is going to be happen. @leonerd's answer speak volumes.

So Perl6 can try to revitalize the "Perl" brand and rebuild the glory ash-droplet by ash-droplet or start through going it's own way.

To choose a new name, I think the list of @nige123 requires "attracts in courses names" and alike, but thanks to shebang, the executable name is not that important (beside for REPL and quick shots - and someone has invented alias for that).

Causes the renaming of the language, that the language isn't Perlish anymore? Do we have Perl Mongers and Raku Mongers is not to distant future?

I understand that "Perl Conference" is mostly understood as "Perl 5 Conference and some tolerated Perl 6 attendees anyway". But how does "Cross compiling for Perl and Raku developers" sound? To me it sounds for two talks on two conferences.

After re-thinking past days and years, I expect also a split of communities and would like to accept this as a likely consequence. This would likely require a head like "The Raku Foundation".

[robertlemmen]

After re-thinking past days and years, I expect also a split of communities and would like to accept this as a likely consequence. This would likely require a head like "The Raku Foundation".

Would that not be a catastrophic outcome?

Also on the notion of "Perl 5, the ugly and dying". I love Perl 6, and I have stopped using Perl 5 pretty much entirely. But that statement would show a level of arrogance and lack of gratitude towards Perl 5 that I find hard to believe exists.

[rehsack]

Also on the notion of "Perl 5, the ugly and dying". I love Perl 6, and I have stopped using Perl 5 pretty much entirely. But that statement would show a level of arrogance and lack of gratitude towards Perl 5 that I find hard to believe exists.

That wasn't intended. That Perl5 is dying is hopefully not a question. And that it has an ugly history neither. Please put it in the context of what people on the street (or on a Linux Conference) get a picture in their mind when you say "Perl" to them. They don't think "Modern Perl" with strict and warnings - they think of line noise and implicit global handles etc.

[shadowcat-mst]

Personally, given I already consider perl5 and perl6 to be sister languages (and have done since masak originally came up with the idea and we popularised it), I consider e.g. CPAN to be the 'comprehensive perls archive network' or so and even if perl6 gets a new name, it will absolutely still be a member of the perl family of languages, and I see no reason to deny them use of the infrastructure.

Whether the camelia/rakudo/perl6/qwertyuiop community themselves will want to use the infrastructure is up to them, of course, but I've argued against perl5 people making them unwelcome before, and I'll make that argument again if I have to.

In fact, for the record, I'm happy to be asked to smack down unconstructive assholery from the perl5 side just in general over this, with the sole exception of /r/perl which I've given up on since the last moderator who actually cared about civility was driven off by Brian D Foy deciding that defending the alt-right by explaining at length to a german that "ACKSHUALLY, Nazis were left wing" was a clever idea.

(ETA: For the record, I have the receipts for that last sentence, and anybody who'd like to see them is welcome to contact me somewhere else so we don't derail this thread any more than my decision to write said sentence has already risked)

[nxadm]

I find the discussion of the relationship with Perl 5 and the Perl Foundation interesting and one worth having in the future.

HOWEVER, @lizmat's proposal is not touching that. It's mainly about fixing the terrible confusing name situation we have today. By adding Perl to the "new" name we pretty much perpetuate the problem (Why would I use "old" Perl when "Raku Perl" is released?<== we don't want that). The relationship with the Perl Foundation is not on the table. No changes are proposed at the moment.

[robertlemmen]

@rehsack Right, I assumed I misread a bit, sorry about that. But perhaps this point does kinda hint in the right direction: Perl 5 has a long a great history and has left it's mark on the world. The Perl community is equally, if not more, awesome. I do very much hope Perl 6 continues this, but it is far to early to tell.

So do we (people using Perl 6) see ourselves as a continuation of that great history, obviously with a slight inflection in trajectory? Standing on the shoulders of giants and all? Or do we see this is an entirely new and independent thing, just bogged down by legacy?

I would hope we fall into the "standing on the shoulders of giants" category. If that means we now name the language differently to avoid confusion, but proudly wave the Perl flag over it, and actively seek to stay within the Perl community, foundation etc then that is fine.

And the "people on the street": if we have something to offer they will change their mind, if we have not then no name-changing will help. People just love bashing other languages, it's like football!

[rehsack]

I remember comments like

I do not intend to go to any future conference with just Perl in it's name since it is assumed being Perl5 only.

These comments in mind (and they came from very different directions), I only warn about the consequences of having split to hard.

On the other hand, when it's not hard enough - we waste a lot of effort with finally no reasonable effect.

So, what do we want at all?

[ghost]

Quoting @pistacchio:

I strongly feel like both the name “Camelia” and the Camelia logo need to go away, because nobody wants to invest its time in something he perceives as a “joke language” and nobody would ever choose a language because it’s “gentle”.

As a similarly interested outsider, albeit a Perl 5 using one, I'm nodding with agreement. I have nothing against the branding personally as my appreciation of Perl 5 - along with a degree of faith in the efforts of Larry Wall and his entourage - exclusively informs my interest in Perl 6. Still, the outside world can be an uncharitable place. In addition to some of the other concerns that have been raised, I cannot realistically see how such a change would do anything but bolster its potential perception as a 'meme' language. Likewise for ofun; while born of a commendable sentiment, I think that it comes across as possessing a degree of levity that is highly unlikely to appeal to all.

While I would very much like for both languages to thrive, the tensions that have arisen over the naming topic have been a tremendous turn off, in my estimation. The situation has gone so far as to damage how I feel about continuing to use Perl 5 for my work. I agree with the comment that this comes across as a "scapegoat" issue. I have never found it confusing or annoying that Perl 6 is called Perl 6. As concerns the marketplace of languages, I think the notion that the fate of Perl 5 hinges in any way upon the name of Perl 6 is a bit of a stretch. As for Perl 6 itself, perhaps a re-branding exercise would lead to further adoption and perhaps it would not. It is not something to be taken lightly. If such an exercise is deemed to be necessary, I would suggest involving an _external_ focus group of some kind, if it can be afforded.

P.S. While it didn't strike any chord with me, I think that Raku has been the most marketable name of those that have been proposed so far.

[sjn]

FWIW, here are my 2 cents.

1. I'm positive for a name change
2. Of the suggestions on the table this time, I'm happy to support "Camelia".
3. While "Raku" is a good name, it is NOT a "unique" name. Raku is heavily used when talking about pottery and traditional Japanese earthenware. Can we please hear from someone in Japan if this can pose a problem in the Japanese Perl communities?
4. Furthermore, any names to be considered should be checked if they have some unfortunate meaning in different languages/countries (as Damian mentiond). This is especially important since the Perl 6 devs has gone to extraordinary lengths to support different languages through it's excellent Unicode support. Let's not throw away one of the greatest strengths of Perl 6 by chosing a name with an unfortunate meaning in India, Indonesia or China or any of the other populous non-English speaking countries. (A side-note here; The next release of the Perl 6 language, 6.e, will be named after a holiday starting with E, and if "Eid al-Fitr" or just "Eid" is chosen, we'd do very well to pick a name that sounds well in the most common languages spoken in the countries where this holiday is a tradition.)

And a final question. Who's voting on this decision (if anyone) and who has any mandate to make this decision final, so we can be done with this topic?

[ab5tract]

Perl 5 should just do what Java did early on when Java 1.2 was called Java 2, and so on.
Call the next major release Perl version 32, and so on.

We've been doing that for a while now ;)

$ perl -v

This is perl 5, version 28, subversion 1 (v5.28.1) built for x86_64-linux-gnu-thread-multi(with 61 registered patches, see perl -V for more detail)

The existence of a clear, pre-existing version upgrade (numbering) path for /usr/bin/perl after Perl 6 decamps seals the deal for me.

[jnthn]

First of all, thanks to everyone who has shared their ideas and insights on this issue so far. I'm especially glad that the discussion here has been constructive and good-natured.

As @AlexDaniel noted at the start of the issue, the topic comes under the "language" label, and so it falls to me to try and shepherd things through to a useful outcome. That outcome will be delivered in the form of a PR to this repository, which will then need to be approved, or have changes requested, by the reviewers. Assuming it is approved and merged, the changes it proposes would then be implemented.

That nicely brings me to the next point: the PR needs to indicate some concrete steps that would happen next, assuming it passes review. I don't want a repeat of the "Raku as an alias" situation, where it was clear there was an alias, but not anything like enough guidance - or chance to build agreement among key contributors - about what implementing the use of it would look like.

Thus, the PR should at least:

1. Propose a new name, denoted * in the following points (no, * is not a naming proposal, it's just a placeholder! :-))
2. Propose a framing for the relationship between * and the Perl language family, so we can try to have it consistently described.
3. Suggest how we can frame a * presence at Perl conferences. It was clear to me from discussions I had at PerlCon that many folks who might be primarily associated with Perl 5 and Perl 6 do want to continue to see each other and learn about things each other are working on at such events. Some folks are, of course, quite involved with both languages.
4. Identify things that would be updated to instead mention * in the near term (scale of days to weeks) following a rename (website? docs?), and how we'd go about that.
5. Propose how we would announce the change. For example, imagine somebody goes to perl6.org, and is redirected to *.org. At least for a while, it'd be good to have something there - probably a pre-agreed article/press-release/whatever. Are there similar situations that need caring about?

If we do go ahead with a rename, it will inevitably be a long-running process, with issues like "what about file extensions", "what about editor support", "what about the command that distributions install", etc. I don't think we need to worry about every last detail of these (and many other) issues ahead of approving a rename, though some reviewers may - like my list above - have things they feel really important to have some clarity/detail on before approving.

Even for those things we are collectively fine deciding to defer, it's still worth enumerating them as "things we'll open an issue here about if the PR is approved". It means we won't forget them, and enumerating them will also help us to understand the consequences of a rename, which I think is important.

While "which name" is, of course, an important decision, the majority of the content of such a PR will likely be about the same. Further, seeing a proposed new name in context may help us to get a better feel for the options. At this point, I think the realistic contenders are (alphabetically sorted) Camelia and Raku. I find it fairly unlikely that there's going to be a new option emerging that - especially with no prior usage - still manages to win over a larger mind share among reviewers.

Getting the PR started would be a good next step. I don't mind who does start the drafting; if folks prefer it be me, it can be (though probably not for another few days), but if somebody else wants to stub it and try to collect positions so far or provide proposed wording, that's fine too.

[Leont]

I have always found Perl6's relationship to be hard to explain to outsiders, and (sadly) prejudice against the Perl brand doesn't exactly help. As such, I think a rename would be for the better.

I don't have very strong opinions on Raku over Camelia, but I prefer the former for the reasons @ @thoughtstream mentioned (ofun is terrible in every way though).

[pjscott]

Let me start by saying that I am excited at the possibility of a name change. I have not been able to justify much professional involvement (let alone public training) in Perl for several years and I hope this may (in time) change that.

In the business (corporate, government) circles that I inhabit all mention of Perl long ago ceased except for legacy scripts that get rewritten in Python whenever funding becomes available. It has been years since I dared suggest Perl for new development and the reaction then was laughter; now it would be damaging to my career. Understand that while this is an _unjustified_ perception (and largely based on _Perl 4_ exposure), it simply will not change in response to any logical argument. It is a reflex that triggers upon hearing the syllable "Perl..."

This is a cross that Perl 5 has to bear; it need not be borne by Perl 6.

Perl 6 _deserves_ better. It is the greatest innovation in computer languages I have ever seen. Whilst its _development_ stands on the shoulders of giants, it gains no cachet in its public perception from the Perl name and instead is mired in negative associations.

A language this revolutionary deserves a unique name. That it has more in common with Perl 5 than any other language does not change that.

There is also a substantial benefit in public perception from a name that doesn't contain the Perl syllable, which is that a sizeable community is always hungry for the next new thing. And Perl 6 is radically new. The OSCON I attended last month paraded an alphabet soup of new technologies that are midgets next to our language but they got attention and we didn't. I know we have more to offer than the flavor-of-the-month, but being shiny can get us the boost we need and deserve.

I make these observations reluctantly, because the name of Perl served me personally very well for years. But everything I said, I find incontrovertible.

I favor raku because of brevity and communicability: I would not often be asked to spell it in conversation. But if the use of a domain name will tilt the decision, I recommend finding out ASAP what the cost for the .com or .org would be.

[rba]

I agree with the voices here, that it's time to rename Perl 6.

When I first heard about the mascots name Camelia, I had bad feelings as the only other thing I knew with this name where articles for women hygiene. (See http://www.camelia.com/)

The mascot itself looks very childish. I've asked Larry and indeed this was his primary intention. To attract younger persons, teenagers, with this mascot design. The plush version of Camelia though found as well the way in the children room and my younger daughter liked her as much to even bring her to the holidays we have now.

In the meantime I got used to the mascot and it lost my attention. So, my current feelings are neutral now, regarding the name, ok, and the design I accepted.

I'm mostly with @thoughtstream and I have a

• Strong yes to: raku
• Strong no to: Camelia

And I don't see that it will be any other option, than the two, based on the state of the current discussion.

I will continue to use and support both languages. Currently Perl 5 feeds my children, as there is plenty of code still around. And Perl 6 is my preference for my next project.

I've learned that most companies have no clue which languages the programmers are using, beside what the architects tried to push through. In the wild there are far more programming languages in use then what is on the preferred list.

For a new developer having the chance to get a fresh unbiased view of Perl 6 as modern language must be our primary intention.

[kentfredric]

I favor raku because of brevity and communicability: I would not often be asked to spell it in conversation. But if the use of a domain name will tilt the decision, I recommend finding out ASAP what the cost for the .com or .org would be.

And that's easily fixable by other means.

rust-lang.org
ruby-lang.org
r-project.org

Assuming "raku" was chosen, I see no deficit from having the domain "raku-lang.org", and if anything, adds potential disambiguative power and semantic conveyance.

[kentfredric]

The mascot itself looks very childish. I've asked Larry and indeed this was his primary intention. To attract younger persons, teenagers, with this mascot design. The plush version of Camelia though found as well the way in the children room and my younger daughter liked her as much to even bring her to the holidays we have now.

When this Issue was raised, I was more favourable to Camelia, but I suspect that's my anglo-centrism playing up.

As the issue has progressed, "raku" has indeed grown on me, and I have a suggestion that might find sympathetic ears:

• "raku" could be the "new language"
• "Camelia" could be a tailored distribution of raku, more heavily curated for beginners and children.

[1nickt]

But - I really think Perl5 is dying, for several reasons. Legacy code will run for likely decades without making Perl5 passing away, but it's neither taught at school nor chosen for new projects (the first causes the second) - beside a handful of exceptions (/wave @tau Station).

Mr. Rehsack you are so wrong about this and it makes me sad that you of all people would say it. At the very large public company I work for, sure, more new projects are started in other languages combined than in Perl, but that's also true of the projects started in Node, Java, or anything else! And the core architecture of my company, and the last one I worked for (2nd largest HR company in the world) was all Perl. Come on, no one can bust out APIs like a Perl developer!

Many of us who have been around for a long time remember when Perl was kicking ass, and now that it's one among many and not usually the most "popular" with the hip kids, some of us conclude "Perl is dying" but that is a logical fallacy. I bet ya dollars to donuts that Perl runs an order of magnitude more websites now than in 1998 -- how is that dying?

I understand that "Perl Conference" is mostly understood as "Perl 5 Conference and some tolerated Perl 6 attendees anyway".

Wat? We can't wait to get our Perl conferences back!

[lizmat]

After reading the remarks by @thoughtstream , I decided to not make the same mistake as Larry did many years ago: I will accept Damian's strong suggestion to use "raku" and would hereby renounce my own suggestion for "Camelia". I will now start to draft a PR on which can be voted. This may take until tomorrow.

[virtualsue]

Is a PR really necessary? Larry Wall chose this name (raku) last year.

[AlexDaniel]

Is a PR really necessary? Larry Wall chose this name (raku) last year.

Absolutely, yes.

[jnthn]

Is a PR really necessary?

Yes, because:

1. That's the process we've been establishing for problem-solving.
2. As I indicated yesterday, there's much more to do than "choose the name".

[pudge]

In fact, for the record, I'm happy to be asked to smack down unconstructive assholery from the perl5 side just in general over this, with the sole exception of /r/perl which I've given up on since the last moderator who actually cared about civility was driven off by Brian D Foy deciding that defending the alt-right by explaining at length to a german that "ACKSHUALLY, Nazis were left wing" was a clever idea.

No one chose you — of all people — to be the “unconstructive assholery” police, despite your unsurpassed expertise in the area. You are lying about what happened, and it is irrelevant to the discussion; why you chose to even bring it up here is anyone’s guess.

[nxadm]

@shadowcat-mst @pudge Can we keep this discussion not related to the renaming out of this thread? Most people miss the context about "what happened" anyway, so discussing it here is moot. Thanks for understanding.

[shadowcat-mst]

@1nickt If you think that "getting our conferences back" would be a net win, you're seriously underestimating the advantages that cross-community pollination has had. Check your dependency chain on a few apps maybe, and consider what life would be like without any code available that depends on Moose, Moo, Role::Tiny, Type::Tiny, or the perl keyword API.

I much prefer the world where I get to use all of those, and if you do too, you should reconsider your position, because without the shared conferences and community you wouldn't have any of these things.

[nxadm]

@1nickt Much like the relationship with the Perl Foundation is not included in the proposal, the decision to split or continue to have "combined" conferences is not on the table at the moment. (Furthermore, no committee or BDFL will stop you or someone else if you want to organise a conf exclusively centered on something, eg. Perl 5, Perl 6, Mojolicious or Cro.)

[pudge]

I was a member of p5p, and in the meeting when Perl 6 was announced (not the mug-throwing meeting, the next one), just over 19 years ago.

I’ve been saying for probably 18 years that Perl 6 should change its name, for essentially the same reasons @lizmat listed here. I gave up trying to convince people maybe 10 years ago. 😆

I have nothing at all against Perl 6, and nothing against sharing CPAN, and conferences, and anything else. My only problem is, and has always been, the confusion created by the name. From where I sit, it is a lot later than I would have liked, but I still think a name change is the best path forward.

I do not get a vote, and would not want one, but I approve of a change, whatever the Perl 6 folks think it should be … as long as it is not “Perl $N”. 👍

[Plato]

There is much more to do than choosing the name, but there is even a lot more to do than preparing related materials and announcements, etc. too.
The marketing side of things _is_ important, and if we want to be effective it behooves us to take a methodical approach. As programmers, we’ve surely all complained about not getting proper specs for a project. But I have not seen anyone offer a precise definition of the problem to be solved, or explain how exactly the proposed solution will fix it, or how to tell whether it has succeeded or not.

I understand the issue in vague, hand-waving terms, but how will changing the name put two decades of toothpaste back in the tube? Is it just going to replace one set of problems with another? Does anyone have any actual data on how many people like or dislike X because of reason Y? And so on.

The PR aspects should not be divorced from the other issues either. As AJS pointed out, a new name is a big deal — or should be, if it’s handled properly. This is an opportunity to get attention for P6^WRaku^W*, and we want it to be good attention, not bad. It’s the sort of thing that would typically go along with, say, an official “v1.0” release, something significantly positive. Otherwise it’s likely that it won’t have much of a worthwhile effect, or even will have a downright negative effect.

[jubilatious1]

Hello @lizmat and others, since it seems inevitable that Perl 6 will undergo a name-change, here are two name suggestions:

NUPERL:

www.nuperl.org
www.nuperl.com
www.nuperl.net

NEUPERL:

www.neuperl.org
www.neuperl.com
www.neuperl.net

One might imagine the prefix "nu" is a shortened form of "numerical", but it could also harken back to the Old English "nu" meaning "now". (Okay, it could also stand for "nuclear" or "nucleus", suggesting the "Nuperl" language acts like a cellular nucleus to direct and control cellular processes).

One might imagine the prefix "neu" is a shortened form of "neural" or "neuronal", but it could also harken back to the Proto-Indo-European root meaning "to shout." Neural/neuronal meanings could be appropriate if the "Neuperl" language were to be employed in AI / ML. (Okay, "neu" could also be a shortened form of "neutral", but I digress... ).

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=nu-
https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=neu-

One name could be chosen, or both. The extra "e" in "Neuperl" could mean a bleeding-edge "experimental" -dev branch relative to "Nuperl". Or Nuperl/Neuperl could replace Perl6/PDL, respectively.

I have it on reliable authority that some or all of these domains can be donated to the (non-profit) Perl 6 cause, presuming a decision can be reached in a reasonable amount of time. The bigger fear would seem to be a rush to judgement. There certainly is time to 1). gather together multiple Perl 6 name suggestions, and to 2). hold one or more Doodle polls--before making a final decision.

Was that "NP" complete enough? Best Regards.

https://beta.doodle.com/free-poll

[Juerd]

Hello @lizmat and others, since it seems inevitable that Perl 6 will undergo a name-change, here are two name suggestions: nuperl / neuperl

Type check failed in assignment to $name; expected <anon> but got Str.

These suggestions miss the point that having "perl" in the name is confusing and irritating, per the title of this issue. The point is, specifically, to choose our $name where not /:i perl/, and both "nuperl" and "neuperl" cannot pass that test.

[jubilatious1]

These suggestions miss the point that having "perl" in the name is confusing and irritating, per the title of this issue. The point is, specifically, to choose our $name where not /:i perl/, and both "nuperl" and "neuperl" cannot pass that test.

"Question and Answer with Larry Wall"
(Moderated by R. Geoffrey Avery)
The Perl Conference 2018 | Salt Lake City
https://youtu.be/_wJNPOs-Q20?t=2636

Q. [R. Geoffrey Avery, 43:56] _"And a slightly more serious question: Perl 5 and Perl 6 as names, why didn't you pick something different?"_

A. [Larry Wall, 44:07] _"Because I wanted to go to a 'Perl' conference...I didn't want to go to a 'Perl and something else' conference. You guys are Perl people--all of you."_ (applause).

Continuing, Larry Wall goes on to refer to then-current issues surrounding 'Perl 5 / Perl 6 naming' as "a red herring."

Regardless, it seems that Larry Wall wasn't healthy enough to travel to the recent conference in Riga. You want to rename the language he (and others) have been working on for over 15 years now, based on a short (3.5 minute) video greeting message he sent--wherein he admits he isn't in the best of health?

Why now? Why not (for example), Christmas Day 2020?

[pudge]

@jubilatious1:

Larry Wall goes on to refer to then-current issues surrounding 'Perl 5 / Perl 6 naming' as "a red herring."

I think many of us disagree that it is a red herring. Serious reasons were given here for why it is a problem.

Regardless, it seems that Larry Wall wasn't healthy enough to travel to the recent conference in Riga. You want to rename the language he (and others) have been working on for over 15 years now, based on a short (3.5 minute) video greeting message he sent--wherein he admits he isn't in the best of health?

No, it is based on the fact that the naming is confusing, and has — in the well-reasoned opinions of many — hurt both languages, and it is not too late to change it.

Whether Larry approves or not, I cannot say, but his statements one way or another have never been the basis of the desire to change.

[jubilatious1]

@pudge

I don't want to sound dismissive, but we have Lisp and Common Lisp and Emacs Lisp and AutoLISP, correct? We have C and C++ and Objective-C and C#, correct? We have Python 2 and Python 3, correct? We have Vim and NeoVim, correct? So is Perl and NuPerl so far-fetched?

The question arises regarding Perl 6 authors: some have just been picking up traction on their Perl 6 books. What do you tell them, 'sorry'?

Then the question arises regarding new Perl 6 users: is changing the Perl 6 to another name likely to bolster the number of new users, of make them shy away? With no books published under the names 'Camelia' or 'raku', it seems that new Perl 6 users would be left out in the cold.

I'm happy Perl 6 has a great mascot. I'm happy Perl 6 has a great compiler. I just don't think either the mascot's name or the compiler's name accurately conveys the lineage of the Perl 6 language to a prospective programmer.

[Grinnz]

The future cannot be predicted. All we know is the effects the current name has had, and we know they are because it includes 'Perl'. I also am not sure what value conveying the lineage directly in the name has to a prospective programmer, especially when that lineage sets up so many expectations that conflict with the strengths of this language.

[pudge]

@jubilatious1 I make no comments about any proposed name, except for offering my opinion (which I’ve held for nearly 20 years) that “Perl $N” is a bad name. I offer no opinion on “NuPerl,” “Camelia,” or anything else.

Obviously, there are cons as well as pros to changing the name. That is why I am glad I do not get a vote: I would not want to take on that responsibility. I am just stating my preference.

[lizmat]

@jubilatious1 About the "why now?": personally, I hoped that Larry would have said something about how the "raku alias" should be interpreted, something he hinted at doing when he briefly returned to IRC in November 2018. But that didn't happen and this was at least part of the reason an esteemed core developer decided to leave the project. Even at TCPiP, he did not bring it up or was questioned about it. When it became clear to me that nothing would happen at PerlCon in Riga either, I decided to take action. The reasons are explained in my keynote at PerlCon.

I would like to return the question: why not now? Bringing forward a good reason to not do this now, would be helpful to the process.

[flexibeast]

@jubilatious1: FYI, there's a proof development system called 'Nuprl': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuprl

[AlexDaniel]

Thank you, @lizmat.

[Ovid]

@sjn, you wrote:

While "Raku" is a good name, it is NOT a "unique" name. Raku is heavily used when talking about pottery and traditional Japanese earthenware.

Other non-unique names: "Python", "Rust", "Swift", "Ruby", "Go", "Scheme", "Lisp", "Elixir", and so on. Many new languages have emerged in the post-SEO age and have not had an issue with this (though I confess "Go" in particular had Google's might to power it).

If anything, maybe people will learn to write "Raku Programming Language" when they write about it and silence the people who worry (perhaps justifiably) about TIOBE.

Can we please hear from someone in Japan if this can pose a problem in the Japanese Perl communities?

We've had the raku alias for, what, about nine months now? I would hope that if that choice was horribly wrong, we'd have heard about it by now. Unless we have, I wouldn't worry too much. If the raku language is perceived as having some unsavory connection to pottery, so be it. But hey, maybe someone official from the Perl 6 community can email someone from the raku community and ask them, but again, I wouldn't worry.

[sztanyi]

Hope the new name still contain perl or p, e.g. Rakuperl, Camperl, Pumperl, Xperl, P, P++...

[jnthn]

If the raku language is perceived as having some unsavory connection to pottery

Well, the founding moment of Perl 6 did involve smashing pottery, so this could almost be considered a feature... :-)

[nxadm]

If the raku language is perceived as having some unsavory connection to pottery

Well, the founding moment of Perl 6 did involve smashing pottery, so this could almost be considered a feature... :-)

I am starting to love the re-imagined origin story. ;)

[Ovid]

For everyone asking that "Perl" somehow remain in the name or description, I have a few thoughts.

First, I am _very_ tired of talking to clients saying "we're not upgrading because we are waiting for Perl 6."

Second, I've had clients, even _after_ I've explained that Perl 6 and Perl 5 are _sister_ languages and that there's no upgrade path, still repeat point the first point. People who sign the checks often don't pay attention to details like this.

Third, people who sign the checks often _do_ pay attention to popular perception. Thus, "this Perl thing is dead" is an albatross around our neck. To them, Perl 6 _is_ Perl 5 _is_ Perl and there's no way in hell they're going there. So let me coin a new saying: "no one ever got fired for choosing Python." It sucks, but damn it, I want to continue to pay our employees. I want our business to keep going strong. I don't want to, _again_, have to have the 5 vs 6 discussion with clients. Perl 6 having Perl in the name has caused real economic pain to a number of people as a result.

I know just how hard it is to get past someone seeing the word "Perl". It's very hard getting a proposal for a new system accepted if the word "Perl" is anywhere in that proposal. We've done it, but it's not easy. I know there are others on this list who have had similar issues (no names, of course).

This isn't a price thing, either. It's about perceived value. There are large consultancies (Accenture, Deloitte and Touche, ThoughtWorks, Capgemini, etc.) who charge enormous sums of money for small systems written in Java or Python, but they get away with it because the consultancy is trusted and technology choices are similarly trusted. Hell, PostgreSQL has held its own against Oracle for a long time but Oracle still won _despite_ the price because the people who write the checks trusted Oracle. (The upside is that PostgreSQL is surging, often at the expense of Oracle, suggesting that we can turn things around).

So I would _very much prefer_ that raku has a chance to take flight, without Perl in the name or the description. I don't want to bury or hide our past, but I also don't want external knee-jerk reactions to dominate. And people who sign the checks usually don't sit down and take deep looks at underlying technologies. They tick boxes that don't get them fired.

As an aside, those who "are waiting for Perl 6" often have legacy systems written in Perl 5 (or 4!) and they can't get approval to upgrade without a compelling business case and Perl 6 is the "anti-case" because those who sign checks are afraid that any upgrade will be obsolete once Perl 6 is ready. They're acting on incomplete information. Once that fear of an obsolete upgrade goes away, we have a chance of upgrading legacy systems. Thus, more potential work for Perl 5 devs and Perl 6 devs don't have to explain, again, the whole "Perl" thing.

[bazzaar]

I'm of the view that Perl6 is the 100year language, built right, built to last. We don't need to be looking back, the new language will fly on it's merits, going forward. The Perl brand has history and is valuable, and whether some people believe it to be a checkered history (I'm not one of them), to me that is missing the point. Perl6 is an official branch of Perl, and many years of hard work has gone into making it a wonderfully intuitive, powerful and flexible language. It's time now for Perl6 to become Perl, and we can look forward to a hundred years where the Perl community is working together, and not divided. The Perl5 folk have held onto the Perl name for a long time, but Perl6 is the rightful successor. Inline::Perl is there for those wishing to run old perl code, or let the Perl5 gang choose a new name, like "Legacy" or something for the old codebase. It's the natural evolution of things. For those wanting a completely new name for the Perl6 language, I believe that's a misguided strategy, it would send the message that Perl6 wasn't good enough to take the Perl crown, that it was rejected by it's own disciples. Nothing could be further from the truth. The king is dead, long live the king!

[ghost]

@jubilatious1: "The question arises regarding Perl 6 authors: some have just been picking up traction on their Perl 6 books. What do you tell them, 'sorry'?"

If any of the current Perl 6 books has sold over a thousand copies, I would be surprised. Pleasantly surprised, but still, surprised. Maybe "Learning Perl 6", by brian d foy. For several titles, I seem to be the biggest seller of books, and I have done so at conferences, hackathons, workshops, and Perl Monger Meetings. My best sellers so far are "Perl 6 at a glance" and "Perl 6 Deep Dive" by Andrew Shitov, and "Think Perl 6" by Laurent Rosenfeld, and for each of these 3 I sold somewhat more than 200 copies. Both authors told me I was their best selling "outlet".

I think book sales are hardly an argument for (not) renaming a programming language.

[AlexDaniel]

Thanks for feedback, everyone! A lot of the comments provide valuable insights, and it's pretty cool that we can now have these discussions.

That being said, we're over 100 comments now, so if anybody is considering to write another one please make sure that it actually adds something new and useful.

[ggoebel]

About the "why now?": because even if it weren't fundamentally wrong... rebranding now would be ill timed... rebranding ought to align with compelling reasons why people should change their perceptions of the language. IMHO, that time happens when the performance of rakudo is on par with or better than comparable languages.

Even it the timing was right... and aligned to maximize the benefit from rebranding...

On choice of names... Stop bike-shedding this. The BDFL has put a lot of thought into naming. He's given us two options. Basically a choice between "The boy named Sue" or "stage name":

#1 "The boy named Sue": Perl 6 stays Perl 6 because it's Perl damn it. Perl has its baggage, but sticking with Perl will give us gravel in our guts, spit in our eyes, and in the long run, it'll make us tough and the language strong.

#2 "A stage name": Because TIMTOWTDI, Larry has grudgingly conceded that while the language _should_ stay what he named it... the community can give it the alias: "raku". FWIW: It is pretty evident he has put a good bit of thought into why "raku".

IMHO: Any community renaming is a mistake. Camelia and -Ofun aren't good options. Further enshrining self-deprecating negative designed by committee connotations linked to camels and O'Reilly trademarks is a mistake. -Ofun as much as it captures the Perl developers' spirit... is flippant and will present its own barrier to adoption.

If a renaming needs to happen, "raku" is the least bad option. Renaming to remove the 6 might alleviate perceptions which create hardships for Perl 5 developers. Though IMHO that ship has sailed. It might lay the context for folks to separate historical "Perl" prejudice and baggage from all the wonderful work which has gone into Perl 6. But it won't be a magic silver bullet.

Keep Perl Perl.

[1nickt]

"Keep Perl Perl."

Well, quite! And clarify that what's not Perl is not Perl.

Two statistics I wish I had:

1) Percentage of Raku advocates wanting to keep using Perl's name for Raku
who are working professional Perl or Raku programmers.

2) Percentage of working professional Perl programmers who want Raku to
cease using Perl's name.

-nick

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 9:51 AM Garrett Goebel [e-mail]
wrote:

About the "why now?": because even if it weren't fundamentally wrong...
rebranding now would be ill timed... rebranding ought to align with
compelling reasons why people should change their perceptions of the
language. IMHO, that time happens when the performance of rakudo is on par
with or better than comparable languages.

Even it the timing was right... and aligned to maximize the benefit from
rebranding...

On choice of names... Stop bike-shedding this. The BDFL has put a lot of
thought into naming. He's given us two options. Basically a choice between
"The boy named Sue" or "stage name":

1 https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/1 "The boy named

Sue": Perl 6 stays Perl 6 because it's Perl damn it. Perl has its baggage,
but sticking with Perl will give us gravel in our guts, spit in our eyes,
and in the long run, it'll make us tough and the language strong.

2 https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/2 "A stage name":

Because TIMTOWTDI, Larry has grudgingly conceded that while the language
should stay what he named it... the community can give it the alias:
"raku". FWIW: It is pretty evident he has put a good bit of thought into
why "raku".

IMHO: Any community renaming is a mistake. Camelia and -Ofun aren't good
options. Further enshrining self-deprecating negative designed by committee
connotations linked to camels and O'Reilly trademarks is a mistake. -Ofun
as much as it captures the Perl developers' spirit... is flippant and will
present its own barrier to adoption. And even "raku" smacks of a child
rebelling against its parent by rejecting the name the parent thoughtfully
and lovingly gave it...

Keep Perl Perl.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADBWYXI46NA5PNUCR2Q6LULQEQEXBA5CNFSM4IKGGHZ2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4I3MWI#issuecomment-521254489,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADBWYXIW56ETNR6TJQSSA6DQEQEXBANCNFSM4IKGGHZQ
.

[shadowcat-mst]

@bazzaar masak and I and others put in the effort to change everything to talk about sister languages, with Larry's ack, about ten years ago. He calls them sisters in the latest video too.

I can only conclude that you're at least one of (a) utterly ignorant of the history of either of the perl family languages (b) hate Larry and think roflstomping on his decisions is a good idea (c) a shit tier troll trying to restart the perl5-versus-perl6 intercenine wars that have done so much damage to both communities.

I'd ask everybody else in this thread to be aware that in any of those three cases, there's no further argument to be had since @bazzaar is providing a prime example of Not Even Wrong, and as such no further response should be required. I'm going to go back to lurking and wish the perl6ers much luck figuring out what they want to do, I love you bunch of lunatics but I'm well aware it ain't my baby.

[pamplemoussecache]

I think a name change at this point may be more harmful than helpful. Yes, the name Perl may have a negative connotation to some people. I think that connotation has been somewhat ebbing as the popularity of Perl has been ebbing. But at least it's a name people know, and feel like they should know, even if they don’t know much about Perl itself.

Speaking as someone relatively new to the community, I know I personally probably wouldn't have gotten involved with "Raku" or "Camelia" because those names don't have any intrinsic meaning to me, and I have no way of knowing if this "new" language has any staying power, or if it's just another in a long line of fast fashion languages that are trying to catch on.

I think far more important than the name of the community as far as bringing in more users goes is the easy availability of resources to learn it online. Books are wonderful, and still one of my go to resources because I tend to get a more thorough understanding the subject, but they're definitely not my go-to if I'm trying to dabble a bit in a language to see if it's worth learning.

Having interactive online tutorials that are easily google-able, and tutorials that are already integrated into sites where people getting into development go to learn languages (Codeacademy, Codewars, Free Code Camp) is crucial for attracting new people.

I also worry that a name change at this point would cause even more confusion from an outside perspective than there already is on what the heck is going on with the Perl community and languages, particularly if it isn't associated with any drastic improvement in performance/capabilities/etc

Perl 6 is part of the Perl family, and is fundamentally Perl. That's not something that we need to be hiding. Focusing on the negative connotations Perl has historically had is only going to further cement those connotations, and a new name could very well wind up with Perl 6 being lost to the fast fashion of new programming languages.

[japhb]

I've been keeping out of this discussion so far because I didn't feel like I had a lot to say that wasn't already being said. But after introspecting my own unhappiness around this, I realized that's exactly what I had to say: how I feel.

I write in this language because I love it -- it gives me freedom to think about each problem the way I want to, and it's Huffmanized relatively well for the way I like to code so that I don't have to write nearly as much boilerplate as I had to in other languages. I find that feature is not just useful for being able to keep a larger percentage of the codebase on the screen at once, it's also extremely valuable to me both from a mental and physical health perspective, to the point that I've begun thinking of more verbose languages as essentially ableist.

As it is now this language is not perfect of course, but the thing about the waterbed theory of complexity is that it takes a little while for the waves to calm down and for it to get more and more comfortable until it fits like a (favorite) glove. I'm willing to wait; I'm pretty comfy so far, and it continues to get better. I'll be using the language for years to come, whatever its popularity outside the core team, and regardless of my personal ability to ever make money on it.

It makes me profoundly sad though when I see members of that core team leave; we lose a piece of what brought us to this wonderful place. Whether by ragequit over frustration with slow adoption, or attrition due to having to pay the bills (and not being able to pay them writing in our favorite language), we've lost too many productive members of our community. Even many of those who have contributed the most over the years often can only manage to visit occasionally or spend a few hours a month working on the core projects. Every time I see a quiet day on #perl6-dev I cry a little on the inside.

For me at this point it's about people -- how do we retain and grow our virtuous trio of resources: energy, talent, and friends? It certainly seems like slow adoption has hurt us more than I expected. I bought into the 100 year language ideal pretty literally; I wasn't too worried about waiting a decade or two for it to hit its stride and become truly popular, because why would I? I've still got lots of life left to live. Turns out not everyone can wait that long, and in an impatient world, everyone expects you to get busy living (fast growth and wild popularity) or get busy dying (fold up and turn the lights off), and they can't see any other way of being, despite several decades of FOSS reality showing those aren't the only two paths. Certainly comments earlier in this thread about being unable to make a viable business/living with the language popularity and leading compiler in their respective current states show people are getting hurt by lack of rapid growth.

The Perl name has been good to me over the years; it's been my primary family of programming languages since Perl 4. I don't know if changing the Perl 6 name officially will finally bring the growth that we haven't seen so far, or if it will make things even worse as we lose the steady trickle of folks who have heard of or used other Perl languages, coming to give our language a try, and staying because they like it. (I do know that several people at my $day-job get completely stuck on the Perl name and can't get past it, but then my company once hosted Guido and created golang, so you can imagine that the language group think here is a bit biased.)

In addition, I personally think our largest blocks to growth have nothing to do with the name, and have everything to do with our twin weaknesses in performance/efficiency and reliability/resilience. It's too slow for several important use cases, and it's too crashy for several others. Sadly, several of the people who could fix those problems can't work on them full (or even half) time; once again, slow adoption bites us where it hurts.

I'm patient for my own needs, but I'm reaching my limit of seeing my community suffer; something needs to change, and this stands as good a chance as anything. I'll get behind the Raku proposal, precisely because I love Perl 6 -- the language and the community.

[sjn]

If the raku language is perceived as having some unsavory connection to pottery

Well, the founding moment of Perl 6 did involve smashing pottery, so this could almost be considered a feature... :-)

Furthermore, one Raku pottery feature is that it is "glued" together from broken pieces using some precious metals :-D

[ash]

Just for the record, this is happenning bypassing Larry.

[rehsack]

Am 14.08.2019 um 22:04 schrieb Andrew Shitov [e-mail]:

Just for the record, this is happenning bypassing Larry.

As far as I understood the video - on own wish.

[AlexDaniel]

@ash that's correct, there was no involvement of Larry in the discussion so far, and the same can be true for the upcoming pull request (plus related changes) and the approval process. That being said, this repo allows Larry to force any change as they please (“BDFL can force any change as they like, though this should only be used in exceptional cases”), so what's your concern exactly?

[lizmat]

@ash https://youtu.be/T2e0xSOHd-0?t=150

The younger sister, Perl 6, is now nineteen and she's now in the last rebuild of her brain, which happens to all of us in our late teen years. She's becoming her own grown up person and now it's my job to step back a little and let her be whatever she wants to be.

[haukex]

@ash Yes, and I will refrain from interpreting too much into Larry's video message. OTOH, he did seem ok with "Raku". Just for the record, from the #perl6 IRC Logs:

2018-10-25 18:26
<TimToady> Zoffix: just a heads up wrt the alias, which I'm thinking of as "It's the stage name (but Perl 6 still cashes the checks)";
    at the moment I'm liking Raku the best for a short name (it's 4 letters like Enya or Pink or Gaga), with long names of either Raku-go
    or Go-raku (where "go" is Japanese 語 for "language") because I'm not terribly fond of the "-lang" neologism
<TimToady> Ofun is a close second, but unfortunately "fun" is Japanese for excrement :)
<TimToady> also Raku pottery is "imperfect but sophisticated", so that's a fit :)
<TimToady> most of the existing uses of "raku" in trademarks appears to be for medical supplies or food processing
<TimToady> and there doesn't seem to be an existing "raku" command, at least that Linux Mint knows about
...

[jubilatious1]

@wendyga

If any of the current Perl 6 books has sold over a thousand copies, I would be surprised. Pleasantly surprised, but still, surprised. Maybe "Learning Perl 6", by brian d foy. ...
I think book sales are hardly an argument for (not) renaming a programming language.

I did a little digging last night on Amazon and found @briandfoy 's _"Learning Perl 6"_ book listed at # 19 in Amazon's list of best-selling "Functional Software Programming" books. This morning (and as of this post), _"Learning Perl 6_" is ranked # 24:

https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Books-Functional-Software-Programming/zgbs/books/132561011/

I think that's very encouraging. By language, rank # 19-to-24 is even-with-or-ahead-of any functional programming book pertaining to Clojure, OCaml, .NET, or C++, and possibly even F#. Of course, there are significant languages at the top of that list (Python, Javascript/RxJS, Elixr/Erlang, Rust, Kotlin, Go, Scala, Java, Haskell), but is Perl 6 really doing so badly?

More importantly, won't renaming "Perl 6" cause adoption of the Perl 6 language to stagnate?

[Grinnz]

More importantly, won't renaming "Perl 6" cause adoption of the Perl 6 language to stagnate?

This is simply speculation and is not a useful consideration, unless you have some supporting evidence. The current name has had measurable and known effects over the past 19 years.

[masak]

I've been silent on this issue so far because, stance-wise, I feel like the inevitable prune in the corner who refuses to celebrate when everyone else is clearly having a good time thinking about renaming. 🎉

I'm breaking the silence to say that I find it encouraging that people are so on board with it. If this issue has shown anything, it's that there is a fairly broad consensus that a rename would be a good thing.

I like the name "Perl 6" a _lot_. Personally, that's what the language feels like to me; it's a re-imagining of the "Perl" language, inspired by and building on ideas from the deeply successful Perl 5. From regexes to grammars; from blessed hashrefs to an object system; from possible async/concurrency to enviable async/concurrency... Perl 6 takes classically Perl ideas and makes them... more Perl. It's a re-invention of ideas we like and cherish, and those ideas are not Python or C#; they're Perl. If Perl is a language family, it's also held together by a set of ideas and ideals.

Having said that... the inevitable outgroup confusion resulting from the two version numbers in "Perl 5" and "Perl 6" and all the connotations that go with that, and all the community chafing that causes. It's a high price to pay. I can see how a rename would solve that bit. And I don't want to stand in the way of that happening, although I ask forgiveness in advance if the name "Perl 6" sometimes slips out of my mouth... my brain is the kind of old dog that doesn't learn new tricks all that swiftly.

I'm fine with whatever name Perl 6 ends up with. I have no particular attachment to "Raku" as a name, but I'm mostly OK with it. Maybe I'll even learn to like it.

I'm encouraged by people in this issue saying that Perl conferences will go on as usual, with a mix of people from both the Perl 5 community and the artist-formerly-known-as-Perl-6 community. I strongly second @shadowcat-mst in the notion that that cross-pollination has been good for both communities; both the one in conferences and the one in the module ecosystem. Despite all the chafing, that's been a genuinely good thing — existing side by side, not feeling threatened by each other, and competing on cool tech — as hoped for. May it continue.

Slipping back into party-pooper mode once more: I'm not sure how hopeful I would be about a name change magically bringing in lots of new people, supposedly those who were held back by all the fear and loathing confusion surrounding the name "Perl". I think the harsh truth is that Perl 1..5 succeeded in one environment, where it was mostly alone in its niche, and Perl 6 was born in a more crowded era, and therefore has a smaller slice of the pie, relatively speaking. A new name is not going to change that significantly. (I would love to be proven wildly wrong on this one.)

[kentfredric]

This is simply speculation

In fairness, predicting the future from a name change is also speculation.

[jubilatious1]

@flexibeast

FYI, there's a proof development system called 'Nuprl': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuprl

Larry Wall released Perl 1.0 on Dec. 18, 1987. At this time, there was already a PRL Project group at Cornell University, established about eight years earlier, in 1979. "PRL" at the time stood for "Program Refinement Logic" and now refers to "Proof/Program Refinement Logic".

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/mathematics/type-theory
http://www.nuprl.org/Intro/subintro.html#origins

The point being, Larry Wall wasn't dissuaded from calling Perl "Perl" because the acronym "PRL" ("Program Refinement Logic") was in use.

Nor should present day Perl5/Perl6 people be dissuaded from using "Perl-with-an-e" in present day incarnations of the language, whether that language be named "Perl 5", "Perl 6", "NuPerl", NeuPerl", "SixPerl", or "Peril" (okay, the last one I found on reddit... ).

[nxadm]

@jubilatious1: most reactions seem positive about the change, I get that. Some want to keep the Perl 6 name. I disagree, but I get that too. What you are trying to do escapes me completely.

Rename while keeping the confusion (the main reason for a rename)? You realize that people will read "NuPerl" and "NeuPerl" as "New Perl"? I don't know you, but it sounds like trolling to me.

[kentfredric]

The point being, Larry Wall wasn't dissuaded from calling Perl "Perl" because the acronym "PRL" ("Program Refinement Logic") was in use.

Nor should present day Perl5/Perl6 people be dissuaded from using "Perl-with-an-e" in present day incarnations of the language, whether that language be named "Perl 5", "Perl 6", "NuPerl", NeuPerl", "SixPerl", or "Peril" (okay, the last one I found on reddit... ).

Problems:

• The internet wasn't a global power that all consumers used and knew about in 1987.
• Subsequently, neither Perl or PRL had any kind of "global awareness"
• PRL was, and still is, an incredibly unknown thing.
• Using any term that includes "Perl" today will clearly indicate to people "its Perl, basically", and will make assumptions therein.

Similarly I don't imagine people who hate "vim" to be jumping at the opportunity of using "NeoVim" ( Vim had hard enough of a problem shaking the shadow of "vi" from its head, people still think they're equivalent )

Similarly, you still have to occasionally explain to somebody that C and C++ aren't simply interchangeable.

And you still have to routinely explain to people that "JavaScript" doesn't require you to have Java.

So please cease with this pattern of "We want to get rid of the word Perl in our name because its hurting" and providing a solution of "How about you put Perl in our name in this other way".

Because its pretty much hand-waving over the realities of globally connected communities and human psychology.

[pjlsergeant]

Twitter:

• raku and rakulang are both already taken with legit accounts
• I have registered raku-lang, let me know when and to whom to transfer it to if this goes ahead

Facebook:

• raku is already taken as a group name
• I have registered rakulang and raku-lang, let me know when and to whom to transfer it etc

[Grinnz]

This is simply speculation

In fairness, predicting the future from a name change is also speculation.

Indeed and I am not going to say "changing the name guarantees a boost in popularity" or anything along those lines. I can only speak to the benefits that have already happened even when the alias was suggested in relieving intra-community tension, and the opportunities that a rebranding affords if taken advantage of (and a bit of luck), as evidenced by numerous instances in history.

[arnesom]

What _exactly_ is the point about a rename?

Haters of Perl 6 will not stop hating it just because it has been renamed, and I am sure that some of them will do a fine job of alerting possible users that it is Perl 6 in new wrapping. So we'll end up explaining about Perl 6 all the time, regardless.

Haters of Perl 5 will just as surely inform possible users of Perl 5 about the fact that it is obsolete; "even the creator moved on, and he ditched the 'Perl' name"

The only reason I can see for a rename, is to allow Perl 5 to be able to get a new major version number in the future (and that must be 7, to avoid a mess). But how realistic is that? A new
version would imply breaking changes, and that means fragmentation - as Perl 5 vs Perl 6 has shown.

As to the success of the "raku" alias? Was it actually a success? Wasn't it basically a Zoffiz one man show silently ignored by anybody else?

Just to show my ambivalence; what about the name "six"?

[jubilatious1]

@lizmat

I would like to return the question: why not now? Bringing forward a good reason to not do this now, would be helpful to the process.

Because it is totally unexpected, from an outsider's viewpoint.

I'm really trying very hard to process what has gone on in the past 19 years since Perl 6 was announced. I can see how people are angry. I can see how people have taken sides. I can see how people have decided to push forward, whatever the consequences. But what I can't see is dissociating "Perl 6" from the "Perl-brand", so to speak.

Perl is synonymous with text processing. Perl is synonymous with Unicode support. Perl is synonymous with TMTOWTDI (and maybe even TAFTMWTDI, as Sawyer X has recently commented). Hearing the new Perl 6 feature list, people will be more inclined to try out an "object-oriented" Perl, or a "gradually-typed" Perl, or a "concurrent" Perl, than just about any other language family boasting one or more of the same features.

I've written back to @wendyga elsewhere in this thread that at least one Perl 6 book seems to be taking off. And synergistically, Derek Banas has put up a Perl 6 video on YouTube that has garnered over 19,000 views in about 6 months. https://youtu.be/l0zPwhgWTgM

So, the answer is simple, and a rather old-fashioned one. It's often said that for a compromise to be reached, each side must be a little unhappy with the end result. What's the end result? Each language retains "perl" in the name, but neither language is granted the bare-word "Perl" name:

• Perl 5, after achieving five proverbial Super Bowl rings à la Charles Haley switches hands and changes to "Perl5" (suggestion by Ingy döt Net -- Lightning Talk ). This could be "Perl5" or "PerlV" or something similar. Depending on the final name, this lets the Perl 5 branch initiate a new version numbering scheme.

• Perl 6, after five years of refinement since release of Rakudo Perl 6 #94 “коледа” on Christmas 2015, changes it's name on Christmas 2020 to "RakuPerl" or "NuPerl" or "NeuPerl" or something similar. This lets the Perl 6 branch initiate a new version numbering scheme.

[kentfredric]

Perl is synonymous with text processing.

In the "cultural awareness", Perl is also synonymous with:

• The Horror Show of Matts Script Archive
• formmail.pl
• /cgi-bin/
• "Write Only Language"
• "Line Noise"
• "A dead language that nobody uses"
• "A language you get laughed at for suggesting for production"

That's not to say any of those things are necessarily reflective of what Perl is today, the legacy in the cultural awareness remains.

If you want those associations to remain, stick with the label that brings it.

[Grinnz]

@jubilatious1 Much of this is looking through rose colored glasses. To assess how to move forward realistically, we must cope with reality.

The reality is, Perl is also synonymous with terrible, ancient, unreadable, line noise, obsolete in the minds of the vast majority of the programming and enterprise community.

The reality is, Perl 6 has many great features to bring to the table which are the opposite of what Perl is known for. Primarily, easy concurrency, a modern design, and many "redoes" of the fundamental mistakes in Perl. It is not only incompatible with many established Perl ways of doing things, it has better solutions that are considered infeasible in Perl.

The reality is, Perl cannot change names. It has been a language used and known to the world for 30 years. People know (even if they don't really know) what Perl is. Perl 6 has been known for most of this time only as the boogey man that adds to the excuses why you shouldn't use Perl (because of the implication that the current version of Perl will be obsoleted). As a mature language it has only been around a few years and it is quite relatively unknown. It has plenty of time ahead to make its identity known, and it would be a disservice for that identity to be drawn into the one already cemented as Perl.

The reality is, Perl 5 is not going away, or being replaced. The name of Perl 6 implies this inherently. This is both misleading and the source of nearly all contention between the communities.

These are real problems no matter how much any of us may wish they weren't. Painting pictures of scenarios where it's okay doesn't change what we have all been dealing with for years.

[1nickt]

"Haters of Perl 6 will not stop hating it just because it has been
renamed"

As a somewhat notoriously vocal critic in some places of what I have for
many years viewed as a small group of Rakudo enthusiasts squatting on
Perl's name and in its space, I can assure you that, if by "haters of Perl
6" you are referring to people like me, or like any of the many other Perl
programmers whom I know and of whom I know who share my view (many much
more brilliant and most much less divisive), then you could not be more
wrong.

The only thing anyone I know has had against Raku for years is the name;
I think what you will mostly hear from Perl programmers heartened by this
move, besides applause, and "good luck," is the whooshing sound of an
unblocked community moving on.

• nick

On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 7:50 PM arnesom [e-mail] wrote:

What exactly is the point about a rename?

Haters of Perl 6 will not stop hating it just because it has been renamed,
and I am sure that some of them will do a fine job of alerting possible
users that it is Perl 6 in new wrapping. So we'll end up explaining about
Perl 6 all the time, regardless.

Haters of Perl 5 will just as surely inform possible users of Perl 5 about
the fact that it is obsolete; "even the creator moved on, and he ditched
the 'Perl' name"

The only reason I can see for a rename, is to allow Perl 5 to be able to
get a new major version number in the future (and that must me 7, to avoid
a mess). But how realistic is that? A new
version would imply breaking changes, and that means fragmentation - as
Perl 5 vs Perl 6 has shown.

As to the success of the "raku" alias? Was it actually a success? Wasn't
it basically a Zoffiz one man show silently ignored by anybody else?

Just to show my ambivalence; what about the name "six"?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/issues/81?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADBWYXMCVGKLNYK6QLHJJJLQESK6DA5CNFSM4IKGGHZ2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD4KNZKQ#issuecomment-521460906,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADBWYXI5EGVF63BVIR4LWI3QESK6DANCNFSM4IKGGHZQ
.

[duncand]

I don't see why "is it done yet" should be a factor about whether to rename.

There are lots of new programming languages coming out and being promoted each year. While some are developed internally at big companies and only announced when they're already in a production ready state, many others are not, they are often still well in development. Typically every language is based on some other language or several.

If we announce "Camelia" or whatever, people should be judging that as it is now, like they judge any other newly announced language. It doesn't matter if the new language has a Perl heritage, lots of languages are influenced by Perl, and yet they still stand on their own.

As it is now, Camelia et al is feature complete and has decent toolchain and documentation and infrastructure support, it can be used now for real work, and it is continuing to be improved.

[duncand]

I think we either should have an actual formal rename, "Perl 6" becomes "Camelia" or whatever, and that this is not just an alias / "stage name", or we don't rename it. If we rename, "Perl 6" should just be a historical note in the documentation, and otherwise everywhere "Perl 6" or "perl6" or whatever appears, it is renamed. A "stage name" is worse than other options.

[hythm7]

I'm all for renaming Perl 6 to Raku, and I look into the renaming as one step forward in the right direction to solve the major issue of Perl 6 not being widely adopted by programmers. That being said, I don't think the renaming by it self will make big change to the adoption issue.

I tend to think that this is not the best time to rename the language and the renaming should wait till accompany it with major improvement in the performance, this will will help greatly in marketing Raku, rather than being perceived by outside programmers as "meh it is just a rename". But if such major performance improvement is not happening in the near future ( 6 months for example ) then I think the renaming should happen now.

[zaucker]

raku.org and raku.com are both registered as domain names, same for camelia.
raku-lang.com and .com were registered the day before yesterday.
I guess that’s what the above comment “find out what they cost” was about.

[lizmat]

@jubilatious1 Seeing no action to what Ingy proposed in the two months after TCPiP, made me realize that it won't happen: not in p5p, not in the outside world. Which was one of the reasons for me to go for a rename.

As to RakuPerl: this still has the name "Perl" in it, with all of the negative connotations from the Perl 5 community, and outside of the echo chamber. Raku will not deny its heritage, but it will not confront any new user immediately with it either.

@hythm7 I would be all for not making the rename "official" until we can associate it with a significant release if that were possible in the next 2 months. This should not prevent us from making as many arrangements as possible before that, so that we can release Raku with a promotional bang.

[bazzaar]

@shadowcat-mst, ... well I did not expect to be personally vilified, just for stating my genuine belief that Perl6 should succeed Perl5 as the principal Perl language. For the record I am not a hater of anything or anyone, and neither am I an internet troll. I've been a Perl advocate and user for the best part of 20+ years, and have resisted the move to (at the time) more fashionable languages. About 3-4 years ago I began to use Perl6 for almost all the programming tasks I set myself, for me it was a step worth taking. I suspect you attacked me because you'd quite like the little sister language to emigrate to a new namespace, and I dared to suggest the opposite.

[leonerd]

I'm verymuch with @Ovid and @Grinnz on this issue - they've both said basically what I would say. In summary: that the word "perl" has quite a dirty image outside of the Perl 5 and Perl 6 echochambers.

In Perl 5 I have been working hard to try to improve the language itself, but whenever I talk to people outside - and I do that a lot at non-Perl geekery things such as in my overlaps with the electronics world - the name "Perl" is almost universally met with derision or disappointment. A rename away from "Perl 6" is your big chance to get away from that. Perl 5 is stuck with this unfortunate connotation. The language currently called Perl 6 doesn't have to be.

With no hint of a joke, I feel that for every potential future user you might lose from not having "Perl" in the name, you'll gain at least 2 or 3 that now won't be turned off by the very same.

[pamplemoussecache]

We should be careful not to cut off our nose to spite our face.

This is definitely said from the perspective of a 20-something year old developer, but in order for Perl to be a dirty word, that requires people to know what Perl is. My impression from talking to developers under the age of 30-35 is that Perl is an old language that they feel like they've heard of before, and that's about it. It's generally put into the same category as C.

I know the denunciation of Perl has been bad in some areas of the field, but for that level of dislike, people have to continue to care. And frankly, as the popularity of Perl has faded, so has that derision. It still has some name recognition, but the stronger feelings associated with the name in the last couple decades aren't necessarily there, particularly among us younger folk.

I've been able to use Perl 5 and Perl 6 at work, because my bosses have heard the word "Perl" before, and assume they have some staying power. I haven't been allowed to use things like Rust or Kotlin, because in the eyes of my bosses, they're just another bunch of new, no-name languages that might not be around in a year (despite the fact that they've both been around for nearly a decade now).

We would be far from the first community to reclaim a word with a negative connotation to it. And the chances of success on that front are likely higher for us, because those negative connotations aren't something that the younger half of developers have.

[jubilatious1]

@lizmat Name recognition is valuable. Type in perl to your browser, and you'll get 130 Million hits on Google. (That's more than C++ or Haskell or F# or Kotlin or Erlang or Clojure--but surprisingly, less than Scala). Type in perl 6 to your browser, and you'll get 116 Million hits on Google. Type in perl6 to your browser, and you'll get 607,000 hits on Google.

Type in raku to your browser, and you will _auto-complete_ to rakuten which will return 717 Million hits on Google. The top hit is Rakuten, Inc. and their main website: www.rakuten.com (depending on country). That's about as many hits as Alibaba and Baidu _combined_:

_"Rakuten, Inc is a Japanese electronic commerce and Internet company based in Tokyo and founded in 1997 by Hiroshi Mikitani. Its B2B2C e-commerce platform Rakuten Ichiba is the largest e-commerce site in Japan and among the world's largest by sales."_ Quote from Wikipedia. (FYI, the Japanese word "rakuten" means "optimism").

If you truncate your search and Google for raku only, you'll get 29 Million hits on Google, most pertaining to Japanese pottery. Depending on where you live, you're very likely to see links to local Japanese restaurants with raku in their name. So it might take significant time and/or effort for newbies to find raku, considering the namespace is relatively crowded.

Are there programming languages with other connotations? Certainly, however they often have strong corporate support (Swift, Go, Ruby, Rust). But why throw away individual name recognition ("Perl") when you already have it?

Oh, and nuperl or neuperl you ask? The namespace is clear: nuperl has under 3000 Google hits. And 'neuperl` has under 16,500 Google hits, with _suggestions_ popping up for 1). Neuperlach, a borough in Germany south-east of Munich (1 Million hits), and 2) Neoperl, a Swiss/German manufacturer specializing in plumbing supplies, first established in 1959 (1.6 Million hits).

The names nuperl or neuperl would signal a break from the past while still preserving the perl heritage. And when some academic (think BioPerl) manager or corporate bean-counter says "let's rewrite that old Perl code in XYZ language", the obvious answer will be nuperl or neuperl, not one of the many fine functional programming languages mentioned earlier.

www.nuperl.org
www.neuperl.org

---

@wendyga Some more book sales data. Moritz Lenz's two "Perl 6" books each have thousands of downloads on the SpringerLink website. One book is approaching 10,000 downloads. So "Perl 6" book sales do seem to be proceeding apace:

"Perl 6 Fundamentals" -- 9.8K downloads
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4842-2899-9

"Parsing with Perl 6 Regexes and Grammars" -- 5.2K downloads
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-4842-3228-6

Doesn't that look encouraging to you?

[nxadm]

Each chapter (even the samples) count as a different download. 🤦

[kentfredric]

It still has some name recognition, but the stronger feelings associated with the name in the last couple decades aren't necessarily there, particularly among us younger folk.

I suspect your peer-group is tilted.

I vendor for gentoo, and in practically every channel, every time people talk about "Perl", its in a negative light, usually channeling old mantra. Even "Perl 6" gets the same reactions, some of those reactions being about "is it ready yet?"

I've had to work extremely hard to counter this.

( And its been getting _worse_ lately due to the new problem of "perl 5 upgrades break stuff", despite putting in monumental effort to mitigate that breakage. The remaining problems are actually inadequacies in our package manager, but the average user just sees the word "perl" in its context and assumes its just more of the same )

The arguments you present now, if the rust team took them as valid, would have decided that "rust" is possibly _the worst_ name a programming language could have, because well, rust is such a prolific concept.

I mean ....

• https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=rust%20pipeline
• https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rust+pipeline

The key aspect is how appropriating an existing name in a new context doesn't hurt. Its only when you appropriate the existing name in the same context that people perform some kind of perceptual transference between the two.

( And can we talk about how "R" and "C" are both conceptually terrible for Googling? But its a moot point )

[kentfredric]

Also, what are you going to do 50 years from now, when its still called "nuperl"? It won't be any kind of "new" any more, and you'll be stuck with an outdated term.

Hardly something you want if your language is supposed to last 100 years.

( See also all the projects that fork something that was dying, add -ng to their name, and then die, and then somebody forks that, and confusion ensues about what to call it )

[ohmycloud]

"Rakudo" is short for "Rakuda-dō" (with a long 'o'; 駱駝道), which is Japanese for "Way of the Camel". "Rakudo" (with a short 'o'; 楽土) also means "paradise" in Japanese.

Maybe rename to Rakudo is ok.

[ggoebel]

I believe in Perl. When I say Perl I do so with pride. If people denigrate or belittle that... that says something about them. But it doesn't define me, make me ashamed, deny, or distance myself from Perl.

I'm deeply saddened and disappointed to see this divisive renaming moving forward in a manner which completely disassociates raku from Perl. A rejection of TIMTOWTDI, a rejection of Perl culture, community, and identity. Deadnaming Perl.

As pamplemousse said, this is cutting off our nose to spite our face. It will hurt Perl. The Perl community (and those who have built their personal silos around Perl 5 vs Perl 6) need to be the people Larry believes us to be. We need to learn to fight and forgive, move on, and become supportive siblings. Thanks to the work of mst, masak, jnthn, and others, I think this has progressively been the case. IMHO the current rehash of the re-naming debate is allowing vocal minorities who cry loudest to undermine progress, misrepresent the will of the community, and force "their way" as "the one true way".

lizmat is an amazing, talented, and extremely productive long time contributor to Perl. Right now I feel about her about the same way she felt about Zoffix when he asked Larry for an inch and took a mile in his own attempt to force the renaming issue. If this really were a community renaming, there would at a minimum be an attempt to reach out to CPAN and Rakudo/NQP/MoarVM contributors to survey the community's collective opinion. I hope this attempt fails too. Though I hope lizmat won't throw a public tantrum, take her ball, and go home like Zoffix did.

Far better would be to double down on embracing the name "Perl". Own it. Take it back from those who use it to denigrate and belittle. Wear Perl like the badge of honor it is with pride. -Like the LGBTQ community did.

I can't for the life of me understand why this has to be all or nothing.

lizmat has played the Bob Dylan Zimmerman card. There is also the example of John Mellencamp. Another American signer/songwriter with a German last name. His first label MCA forced the "Johnny Cougar" stage name on him. It didn't work. His 1st and 2nd LPs were flops. The label dropped him, and it took him decades to reclaim his identity. Johnny Cougar => John Cougar => John Cougar Mellencamp => John Mellencamp. Perl already has an established identity.

Don't reject your sisters, your _self_, and your history. Embrace the suck, wear it with pride, and show the world the grace, beauty, and power that is Perl.

[shadowcat-mst]

@ggoebel Senior contributors have been thinking over how to do this since 2008 or so. Patrick Michaud, jnthn, masak, etc. have all been involved in that planning, and I've been looped in repeatedly to help figure out how to make sure the perl5 community doesn't get in the way.

I'm afraid that from my POV, the 'reach out and survey' process has been done every couple years and so far as I can tell the people actually doing the programming continue to be in favour of getting the language out from under this ridiculous argument so we can all move on with having two perl family languages and go back to writing code.

Thing is, perl6 tries to be nice, and gentle, and avoid conflict ... so the sort of reflexive attack that you just made without being fully informed first has an unfortunate tendency to cause the people whose opinions you want to hear to stay out of conversations in public. Or: your heart is clearly in the right place, but you're unfortunately misinformed in a way that actually exacerbates the problem. Sorry.

[jubilatious1]

@nxadm > Each chapter (even the samples) count as a different download. 🤦

http://www.bookmetrix.com/detail/book/139fb2d4-2977-483e-aaf4-a2deee93c0d1#downloads
http://www.bookmetrix.com/detail/book/c0d7bd00-093b-4465-9cfc-aabe83d91788#downloads

I was trying to point out to @wendyga that not all Perl 6 book sales are physical book sales. Two notes about the SpringerLink/Bookmetrix data:

• First, I don't see any way to buy an individual chapter, at least through my browser. So readers are apparently buying the whole ebook, but only downloading individual chapters of interest. [The Bookmetrix system makes sense, if you're a book author interested in knowing which chapters of your book have been most interesting to your readers].

• Second of all, I've read the Bookmetrix disclaimers and AFAIK they only count Springer/Palgrave content providers. So Amazon Kindle sales are apparently not included in those 9.8K or 5.2K numbers.

http://www.bookmetrix.com/help/#download-numbers

Kindle Editions:
https://www.amazon.com/Perl-Fundamentals-Examples-Projects-Studies-ebook/dp/B0743BB3SF/
https://www.amazon.com/Parsing-Perl-Regexes-Grammars-Recursive-ebook/dp/B0785L6WR6/

[shadowcat-mst]

@jubilatious1 point here, basically, is 'nuperl' is DOA, and while I personally would've been happy with 'camelia perl', the people who're actually stakeholders seem to've settled on raku and I consider myself to be entitled to an opinion but not a vote.

[ggoebel]

mst: I hope folks can see past whatever they infer as an attack to hear my truth that renaming is inherently divisive, short-sighted, and in the long term a damaging rejection of Perl that will be hard to undo and repair.

Given your successful evolution in the tone in which you write over the years, I will have to do some introspection on my own tone. It was not intended as a reflexive attack, but rather a call to step away from the edge of this precipice of irreparably dividing the community.

FWIW: Perl 5 is still my swiss army chainsaw of choice when I need to JFDI... My use of Perl dates to Perl 4. I'm one of the vast majority of Perl developers who have never attended a Perl Conference. And while I have coded primarily in the DarkPAN, I have also been a CPAN module maintainer, and contributed both directly and indirectly to dozens of CPAN modules over the years. I've also put my money where my mouth is and financially support TPF grants.

I think perhaps the folks on the front lines of this issue are too close to it. The surveying you mentioned did not reach me. I doubt most of the people who have historically contributed to Perl are even aware that this is happening. If they were, I doubt they would like to see the community bifurcate so irreparably. But we'll never know if we don't ask them in a way that is open and transparent.

[Grinnz]

@ggoebel The evidence that you are not sufficiently informed on this issue is that you think the community has not already bifurcated. Please reread my summation as to why this needs to happen for the two communities to have a chance of reconciliation.

[jubilatious1]

@shadowcat-mst I hear you. Just letting people know the nuperl and neuperl domains are available for Perl 6 efforts.

I guess I'm just not getting the whole "negative connotation" argument. Remember how everyone said Apple was sucky and would never survive? How'd that one work out? People love second-acts.

[shadowcat-mst]

@ggoebel The fact that masak and I had to put together the sister languages narrative a decade-ish ago to handle the already-extant irreparable bifurcation more cordially suggests to me that, realistically, the precipice was jumped off a long time ago. Now we're just discussing which sort of parachute is most likely to help us survive the landing.

[lizmat]

@jubilatious1 Yes, name recognition is important. The name "Perl" is very important for the Perl 5 community. The moment the "sister language" meme was accepted, "Perl 6" effectively became a squatter on the name "Perl". This name change is very much about mending the "Perl Community": realizing that they both have a similar heritage (TIMTOWTDI), while also being clear of the different paths in life they are taking. And that one is not the successor of the other.

@ggoebel I also believe in Perl, and I have tried and tried and tried to make Perl better. I've come to the conclusion that the only way to actually make this work in the longer term, is to separate Perl 5 and Perl 6 by name. This has not come easy to me: it has been a source of agony and regret ever since Larry came up with the raku alias.

If there is something that I've learned in my life, is that you should keep trying until it becomes clear to you that no matter what you try, it won't get better. Then you should stop and try something new, change something. Keeping banging your head against a wall expecting something different to happen, is not a sign of sanity. So my conclusion is: something will need to change. I sincerely hope that it will be the rename of Perl 6 to Raku.

[masak]

@liz

The moment the "sister language" meme was accepted, "Perl 6" effectively became a squatter on the name "Perl".

Hm. This feels like a non sequitur to me. Or I'm simply missing a logical step that makes it make sense.

Could you explain why accepting the sister language meme caused "Perl 6" to become a squatter? The whole idea of it was to make the boat roomy enough that both Perl 5 and Perl 6 could ride it.

[lindleyw]

@masak

Could you explain why accepting the sister language meme caused "Perl 6" to become a squatter?

See Osborne effect.

[lizmat]

@arnesom I have good hopes that a rename of Perl 6 will take away the reasons for being vocal about people's dislike of the "other" side. I think this was reflected in a rather less tense atmosphere at PerlCon. At least, that's how I felt it.

Now that it is clear that "Perl 6" is not a sequel to "The Hobbit", but instead a complete reimagination of the source material and is called "Lord Of The Rings" (imagery taken from one of Larry's keynote at FOSDEM), we should be able to all work on / with what we like best.

[lizmat]

@lindleyw The Osborne effect really applied to the situation before the sister language meme became a thing. And yes, that has hurt Perl 5 significantly.

@masak @mst The mere fact that "Perl 6" had "Perl" in its name, while almost everybody in the world then and now equates "Perl" with "Perl 5". Also, if Larry would have allowed a name change at the time the "sister language" meme was forged, would the "sister language" meme ever existed? I think not.

[ggoebel]

@Grinnz I've read your posts. I think you're labelling disagreement as "not sufficiently informed". Which is an ad hominem attack, instead of addressing the argument. What you see as already bifurcated I see as dysfunctional silos of people who would rather blame than support each other. Ignoring the third silent (and hopefully majority) group of folks who just want to get along and move forward.

@shadowcat-mst, @lizmat: I hope "raku" will still embrace its heritage and the Perl family of languages. Thank you for your work and contributions which have continued to move Perl forward. Keep on keeping on. Like mst, I have an opinion but don't merit a vote.

Words like names and symbols are easy to discount as unimportant and interchangeable. But they are extremely important in aligning actions with beliefs and core values. Perl stands for a lot of the values I hold. I haven't got a clue what Raku stands for. And it worries me that a Raku disassociated from Perl will become disassociated from Perl's principals and values.

If I'm beating a dead horse, it is only because like you I care about and love the language and the community.

[lizmat]

@ggoebel I don't think Raku will ever disavow its Perl heritage. If people from "Perl 5" and "Raku" want to have conferences / workshops / meetups together, they will. If some people want to have "Perl" only events, that's ok too. If other people want to have "Raku" only events, that's fine as well. If people want to visit all types of events, that'd be great.

This is not something that can be forced. In a lot of ways, this situation reminds me of a family member coming out of the closet. If the family loves each other, it shouldn't make a difference. If it does make a difference, then that's too bad, but everybody in the family will have to move on anyway, separately. That's life.

[1nickt]

The name "Perl" is very important for the Perl 5 community. The moment the "sister language" meme was accepted, "Perl 6" effectively became a squatter on the name "Perl". This name change is very much about mending the "Perl Community" ...

@lizmat I think it will take quite some time to sort out my thoughts and feelings at seeing you say this ... but I want immediately to acknowledge it and hail it and welcome it and thank you for it.

-nick

[ggoebel]

@lizmat to be clear my thumbs up on your last post is to agree to disagree without being disagreeable. I hear you and respect your perspective. Even if I disagree with it.

The renaming seems forced. Why not openly survey the larger community of CPAN maintainers and github contributors before pulling the trigger? That way even folks on the losing side will at least have had a chance to participate in the process and have their say.

Even though the renaming is a stated intention to get Perl 5 out from under the Perl 6 Osborne Effect... I don't think we will be able to escape the collateral damage of it being largely perceived as either Perl 5 rejecting Perl 6, Perl 6 rejecting Perl, or both. This doesn't "mend" the Perl Community. It is "raku" (Perl 6) moving on anyway, separately.

[cygx]

I've already made my thoughts known elsewhere, but given that this is the 'offical' channel on the topic of renaming Perl6, I'll give it another go:

Perl6 was supposed to revitalize Perl. It did not, and I would argue a major reason for this was that for the longest time, Rakudo was essentially a toy. Despite hopeful release annoucnements, Rakudo Star wasn't even close to competitive.

That's starting to change: Rakudo has things to offer now, and I would argue it is the time to double down on the original dream - but this time not just in theory, but in practice: Reunification summits are nice, but what's the point if there's still no tool that can deal with both Perl5 and Perl6 modules, and you're still unable to embed Perl5 code into Perl6?

Does anyone remember rakudo-p5? It was cool, but the time just wasn't right: What it offered was a not-yet 100% compatible reimplementation of Perl5 that was quite a bit slower than the original and had no access to XS. Personally, I'd like to see that given another shot.

That said, if done well, I could see the rename working out well enough, at least for one of the Perl sisters (sorry, Perl5: unless you do some major redecorating, your time has probably passed) - it's just not what I want to happen...

[vendethiel]

Personally, I'd like to see that given another shot.

The amount of time and effort the JRuby implementation/community has spent (trying to) make IRB C extensions work (and then did drop it) should suggest that this is a pretty dangerous and time-sinking project (as we already know), and I don't think anybody wants into that. rakudo-p5, AFAIK, never even tried to tackle the XS problem, it wasn't its goal (but then, you've done a lot of rakudo-p5, so I'd believe you).

(Yes, nowadays JRuby has a better story of running C extensions on Truffle, but I don't think that's relevant here)

[cygx]

@vendethiel rakudo-p5 is FROGGS's baby, I just tried to fight the bitrot - but at the time, it just wasn't worth the effort given the issues I mentioned. The situation is different now: Rakudo is no longer as slow, we have a decent parallelism story in place, and if you truly need access to XS libraries, there's Inline::Perl5.

[uzluisf]

I'm deeply saddened and disappointed to see this divisive renaming moving forward in a manner which completely disassociates raku from Perl. A rejection of TIMTOWTDI, a rejection of Perl culture, community, and identity. Deadnaming Perl.

Renaming Perl 6 to X doesn't automatically means that it's rejecting the philosophy that we
collectively call Perl. This is far from the truth and a fallacy. Larry Wall's ideologies and philosophy towards programming and Computer Science in general don't live or are strictly attached to a name.
That's why in another comment I stated that "I don't use/like Perl 6 because of its name but due to what Perl 6 is and stands for." However, if Perl 6 can have a fairer shot by renaming it, then what reasons we have not to do it? And who better people to do it than those who, against the odds, have been nurturing the project for over 15 years?

I'd argue the only reason this set of ideologies and philosophy is referred to as Perl is due to Perl being the first programming language to embody and embrace them. For instance, they could've been collectively referred to as Wallism, in which case nobody would've been arguing nowadays that Perl 6 dropping Perl from its name means that it's "rejecting TIMTOWTDI, rejecting Wallism culture, community, and identity."

For the same reason, when I talk about Perl (or Perl 5) and Perl 6 in conjuntion, I refer to them as two programming languages that belong to the Perl family of programming languages, meaning they're two different languages that embrace the same philosophy. The reason for this is that dropping the name Perl 6 immediately implies that it's a newer, better and faster Perl 5 when it's not the case. Thus, a new name for Perl 6 without any association to the name Perl (not the Perl philosophy) might prove to be a win-win situation for both languages and their respective communities. Can we be sure that this will bring massive adoption? I doubt it but anyway, who can be a 100% certain about anything?

Coming back to the new name. For its part, Perl 6 won't crush the expectations of seasoned Perl 5 programmers who will undoubtedly notice Perl 6 isn't Perl 5 (because it isn't). In the other hand, the negative connotation associated to the name Perl (again, not the philosophy) hopefully won't hinder Perl 6 adoption, even as a niche language. Both languages have their merits and they should be able to stand on their own. Perl 5 already has a long and successful history (albeit a tainted one) and hopefully the language and the community continue flourishing. However, now should be Perl 6's opportunity to prove itself and for better or worse, this implicates dropping its association to the name Perl, not the philosophy.

IMHO the current rehash of the re-naming debate is allowing vocal minorities who cry loudest to undermine progress, misrepresent the will of the community, and force "their way" as "the one true way".

The problem here isn't whether vocal minorities "undermine the progress [and] misrepresent the will of the community" but whether over-generalized semi-truths rehashed by these vocal minorities can become absolute truths. To see this in action, you'd only need to post some article discussing a particular Perl 6 feature in one of the currently famous forum and you'll witness what it devolves to.
If no new users are playing with Perl 6 because 1) Perl is dead, 2) Perl is a fossil language, 3) Perl is linenoise, etc., then how will they community grow? People should still have a shot at trying Perl 6, even they don't like it afterward. At the moment, few people are taking that chance due to the several misconceptions. Thus, if there's something we can agree on is that Perl 6 isn't being judged for what it brings to the table but for an unfortunate historical blunder.

Far better would be to double down on embracing the name "Perl". Own it. Take it back from those who use it to denigrate and belittle.

People involved in the community do indeed embrace the Perl philosophy, not the Perl name.

[bazzaar]

At the risk of being knocked down again, I'd like to raise the subject of language competition.

I can see a future where the biggest threat to Camelia/Raku [nee.Perl6] could be a re-invigorated Perl5.

Similar ethos, mission values, similar strengths and features (probably there will be continuous cross-pollenation).

A similar target population of developers/users.

Competition for resources, grants, web presence.

Except Perl5 will be Perl, a glorious history refashioned now it's free of the shackles which bound it.

Perl5 will have CPAN, and a more extensive module ecosystem.

Which of the two languages has the more to lose, the most to gain?

Perl6, a fledgling, fighting Perl5 at it's back, and Python and the rest at it's front.

Perl5, a backwater behemoth with perhaps latent support in abundance.

The current situation. Perl6 has a competitive advantage, it holds Perl5 in check, it is seen as the future of Perl by many, and a technological marvel by many more. It has the Perl stamp of significance.

Change the name of Perl6, this can all change. Relations between the two languages will not improve. Authors will not be tempted to convert their Perl5 modules.

Perl6 might quietly subside, even with it's superior technology.

My question : Why would the Perl6 folk who have put so much into the Perl6 project, even contemplate giving up the competitive advantage the language holds just at the time it looks like it might succeed?

An extra question : Why are the so many Perl5 folk getting involved in the renaming of Perl6, would the opposite be the case if it were a Perl5 renaming discussion?

[shadowcat-mst]

@bazzaar I'm not sure if it occurred to you as you wrote this, but "actually, we shouldn't rename because it would interfere with perl6 crushing perl5" is definitely not an argument what will improve relations or leave perl5 module authors even remotely tempted to convert their perl5 modules.

It saddens me every time I hear of a 5 to 6 porting project that was dropped because of the people doing the work running into this sort of divisive nastiness.

Please don't.

[lizmat]

@ggoebel

... will at least have had a chance to participate in the process and have their say.

I think the responses on this issue are just that. If you have a Github account, you are apparently some kind of developer, and you can participate. Which, I think, is a first in the history of Perl, be that Perl 5 or Perl 6.

[leonerd]

Small side-point: Scheme. "Everyone" knows that Scheme is a Lisp, despite not having the letter sequence "L I S P" in its name. Plus there isn't anywhere this feeling that Scheme is out to "replace" Common Lisp, or vice versa. The two live together just fine. The two generally enjoy a healthy cross-pollination of ideas, each picking up good things from the other from time to time.

Maybe a good model for how Perl 5 and Raku-Camelia-née-Perl6 could be?

[Grinnz]

An extra question : Why are the so many Perl5 folk getting involved in the renaming of Perl6, would the opposite be the case if it were a Perl5 renaming discussion?

As a "Perl5 folk" I have only been involved once people started injecting arguments from a year ago into this issue having clearly missed a lot of the context, which deal with the past and current state of both communities, the aspects of the Perl 5 community which are affected by this decision, and the aspects of the Perl 5 legacy which affect it. I would hope that if Perl 5 had a similar decision to make, and if it had implications to or from Raku, that Raku folk would chime in with relevant information and expertise. I have not commented here on what I think is best for this community, since it's not my decision.

[eritain]

Just so we're clear about conferences, foundations, infrastructure, community, and philosophy: If I'm reading the room correctly, to support getting the string "Perl" out of the name of the language does not imply rejecting those other Perl-branded things, and renaming the language is not meant to change the status quo for those things, which is that two languages coexist in them under the Perl brand.

If either community makes up its mind to permanently stop sharing institutions, that's a separate issue. We'll work out the details of the divorce if/when it happens. No sense discussing a settlement before there's even a clear grievance on the table.

And in the meantime, of course, it remains possible to have a conference just for one language: Brand it "Raku," "Mug Smashing," "Pumpkin Perl," "Perl Classic," etc. Or, for that matter, to emphasize that an event is interlanguage by branding it "Eleven," "Perl/Raku," "Perls," "Larrémon," etc. (Warning: Some of the brands just suggested are known to the state of California to be silly.)

I found "Raku" disappointing when it was announced, but I have to admit it's growing on me, especially with the help of @uzluisf's gorgeous blue-gray and gold logo.

[lizmat]

@cygx

Personally, I'd like to see that (rakudo-p5) given another shot.

Please do. I will help with that in whatever way I can. But It will not be project lead on this, as I have stated earlier in https://www.perl.com/article/an-open-letter-to-the-perl-community/

[JJ]

@bazzaar in both community surveys, around 3/4 of Perl 6 programmers have been before Perl 5 programmers.

It's still used extensively, alongside Perl 6

So I guess we would have as much to say as the next Perl 5 user.

[alabamenhu]

Thus, the PR should at least:

1. Propose a new name, denoted * in the following points (no, * is _not_ a naming proposal, it's just a placeholder! :-))
2. Propose a framing for the relationship between * and the Perl language family, so we can try to have it consistently described.
3. Suggest how we can frame a * presence at Perl conferences. It was clear to me from discussions I had at PerlCon that many folks who might be primarily associated with Perl 5 and Perl 6 _do_ want to continue to see each other and learn about things each other are working on at such events. Some folks are, of course, quite involved with both languages.
4. Identify things that would be updated to instead mention * in the near term (scale of days to weeks) following a rename (website? docs?), and how we'd go about that.
5. Propose how we would announce the change. For example, imagine somebody goes to perl6.org, and is redirected to *.org. At least for a while, it'd be good to have something there - probably a pre-agreed article/press-release/whatever. Are there similar situations that need caring about?

I think this is an important thing to look at the process. As I mentioned on the Facebook thread, I'm fairly indifferent personally to whether the name changes at all, and I like both the idea of strength and resilience that comes from the Raku name and the idea of elegance and versatility that come from Camelia. I'm far more interested/concerned about the process by which a name change will go about.

For #2/3, I think there would need to be some sort of a hypernym devised. That's tricky to do in a way to avoid referencing Perl directly. I'm not sure what that name would be but (and I know it's a terrible example so don't shoot me or consider it a serious proposal), as someone else mentioned, using corporatey lingo we could say "Perl, an Albus language" and "Raku|Camelia, an Albus language". Or maybe using "a TPF language" (in acronym format) could establish a stronger link without using the word "Perl" directly.

With respect to #5: While we are concerned primarily about the P6 side of things, I think it would optimal for both languages to announce a naming shift at the same time. In the case of P5, as they've been naming it Perl 5, version \d+ for some time now, I think recapturing the "pure" Perl name and removing the 5 designation and calling it "Perl, version 31" (or literally anything >6) at the same time would be extremely helpful for both languages. Anyone searching for Perl 6 could still potentially find via google a page on perl.org explaining s/Perl 6/{<Raku Camelia>.pick} and the Perl 5 -> Perl transition, and that could be the extent of P6 mention on perl.org. That would require coordination from both sides, but I think ultimately advantageous to both.

I think for first visitors, and whenever redirected from perl6.org, the best way is to have a small popup panel (out of the way, but visible, we all hate popups blocking info!) explaining "Perl 6 is now Raku|Camelia. Everything else is just the same. More information about the name change". That explanation should not mention any sort of animosity between the language communities, and only say that as both are coexisting, it was seen as best to create a totally separate language name, while emphasizing that the two communities are close in many ways.

[arnesom]

@lizmat: I meant haters outside the Perl 5 and Perl 6 camps, but could have been clearer.

As to possible haters of Perl 6 on the Perl 5 camp, they could think that the damage has been done and nothing would change that. A new name could even antagonise them further; Perl 6 managed to (sort of) kill Perl 5 (at least the momentum and perception), because of the name (and the idea of the new and shiny Perl), and now they abandon that name. Because the Perl 6 camp has decided that the name drags them down.

[genio]

Can we please lock this thread? I fear that continued conversation at this point by non-project members will only serve to add to the confusion and rehashing of conversations.

[Grinnz]

I think it would optimal for _both_ languages to announce a naming shift at the same time.

While I actually agree this would be beneficial, I don't think it's practical. I can almost guarantee Perl 5 will take longer to implement this relatively small change than the one we are discussing has taken, and I wouldn't want this process to be beholden to another one. We two communities do not have a strong coordinated leadership, for better or worse.

[pjlsergeant]

@alexdaniel someone will at some point soon need to draw a line under this discussion; there is an emotional cost and indefinite continued discussion is not free. I wonder if it’s time to ask the people who will need to agree the change if they have enough information?

[jnthn]

Can we please lock this thread? I fear that continued conversation at this point by non-project members will only serve to add to the confusion and rehashing of conversations.

It may, but on the other hand, I've read things in the last 24 hours that I found worth reading (and yes, I'm reading everything, many of them multiple times), and folks are being, overall, reasonable.

Obviously, we can't discuss forever, and perhaps most things worth saying may well have been said. At the same time, it's a weighty decision, and as somebody who will be voting on it, I find seeing a range of opinions - both those that match my current feelings, and especially those that don't - useful.

I won't, for now, lock this, but I will say:

• Please, no more proposals for different names
• If there's a post here already that largely matches your views, stick a :+1: reaction on it instead of repeating the same; I'm paying attention to those also
• There's long been a broad consensus that Perl 5 and Perl 6 should peacefully coexist. There's no intent for that to change upon a rename. I don't believe anybody with a vote on the PR resulting from this issue wishes for it to change. So there's very likely nothing to debate on this matter.
• Similarly, I'm not aware of any desire among those voting to either try to erase the Perl language family connections, or deny the Perl background of the language, as part of any rename. Some of us, myself included, will see that it is made clear both in the resulting PR, that there's a desire to continue having conferences involving the two languages, and continue the exchange of ideas that I believe has been of value to both Perl 5 and Perl 6. After all, as some have pointed out here, the languages have many shared values, even if the concrete ways they realize them in syntax and semantics may differ. (And, of course, I shall continue to advocate for this long after any rename that may happen too.) In short, if this is what you're worrying about, you needn't add a comment, because I - and others - already care deeply about this, and don't need more convincing.

[jdoege]

A few personal observations/opinions.
1) Camelia is just a bit long and, at 4 syllables, longer that way than almost any other computer language name, that may be problematic.
2) Raku is my personal preference. Short, easy to say.
3) Ofun is a programmer's pun. Puns are rarely a good choice. Gnu got away with it but I don't think this community will.

[shadowcat-mst]

Back in '08 pmichaud and I were thinking that "rakudo, an implementation of camelia perl" and "pumpkin perl" were the right answer.

Didn't work out, given we're over a decade later.

If 'raku' has the majority, it doesn't even matter what I think. Good luck @jnthn and per my earlier thing my chainsaw is available to assist your work.

[pmichaud]

At the risk of being knocked down again, I'd like to raise the subject of language competition.
I can see a future where the biggest threat to Camelia/Raku [nee.Perl6] could be a re-invigorated Perl5.
Similar ethos, mission values, similar strengths and features (probably there will be continuous cross-pollenation).
[...]

I haven't been replying in this thread (because others are making good enough points), but I have to call out the above-quoted message as being just completely antithetical to Perl 6 culture, or at least the way I've always viewed it.

• This isn't a competition
• It most especially isn't a competition with Perl 5
• We've never touted "hold Perl 5 in check", nor is that a desirable outcome

I could go on and on... but I think this is sufficient.

Most importantly, if one believes that Perl 6's language capabilities aren't sufficient on their own -- that the only path to success is to make choices and moves intended to actively diminish the value of other languages and environments -- then as far as I'm concerned those beliefs don't accurately reflect Perl 6 culture, nor are they beliefs that I want to see accepted in Perl 6 culture.

Pm

[haukex]

_Slightly off-topic thought:_ I get the feeling that there is a fairly high level of agreement that Perl 5 and Perl 6 are both Perlish languages, so one simple solution to the conferences etc. might be: "Yet Another Perlish Conference", "The Perlish Conference in *", etc ;-)

[kentfredric]

Remember how everyone said Apple was sucky and would never survive

I remember how people said people who bought apple had more money than sense... oh. they still say that.

(not saying its true as such, even if it is, just that people say it, regardless of truth)

[kentfredric]

"The Perlish Conference in *", etc ;-)

Or like, "The Perl Family Conference". But eww, it sounds too friendly. "Bring your kids!".

Actually. Do bring your kids, maybe said conference should have child-friendly workshops.

Its not like Perl5 and Perl6 are the only members of this family now, you could consider:

• moarvm
• parrot (though its kinda an ex-parrot at this point)
• nqp

To be members of this family.

There's nothing to say there won't be more members to this family.

If people want to implement new languages on top of P6/Moar/nqp, whatever, I don't imagine a "Perl Family Conference" would opt to exclude them. ( Though their perceived significance would probably affect the constitution of said conference )

[domm]

_Slightly off-topic thought:_ I get the feeling that there is a fairly high level of agreement that Perl 5 and Perl 6 are both Perlish languages, so one simple solution to the conferences etc. might be: "Yet Another Perlish Conference", "The Perlish Conference in *", etc ;-)

Plus there are always several non-Perl* talks (some even explicitly about other languages like go, JS, etc) at our conferences, so I very much doubt that Perl/Raku content would be considered off-topic by orgas of a Perlish conference / event.

[borisdaeppen]

"The Perlish Conference in *", etc ;-)

Or like, "The Perl Family Conference". But ...

TMTOWTDI- or TIMTOWTDI- or "Tim Toady"-Conference

(or TTBCon as in "TIMTOWTDIBSCINABTE", "Tim Toady Bicarbonate")

[JendaPerl]

people don't want to try Perl 6 because they see Perl and think "oh that's that write-only language" when Perl 6 doesn't have that issue at all.

Beg your pardon? The not-at-all-Perl 6 is way way more write only. Except that often it's not ever write-able since 99.99 % of people have no way whatsoever to produce those nifty Unicode characters.
Every single time I saw an sample of code in several languages including Perl6, the Perl6 version was the least readable. No matter how many other languages I never even heard of were included.

That experiment at throwing every programming concept into a big pot and cooking it for nineteen years ought to be renamed so that it can fail on its own, not confusing the world with similar-if-you-look-from-a-passing-train syntax and it's-just-the-next-version name.

[JendaPerl]

"The honest truth is Perl 6 is a dialect of Perl - and that's something not to be embarrassed about. "

It ain't ain't ain't ain't and ain't! It may have started as that those almost twenty years ago, but it's no longer true.
Perl6 is about as much a dialect of Perl as Finnish is a dialect of Hungarian. (The two languages are related, but got separated about 2500 years ago and are not mutually understandable the way dialects are ... after some getting used to and with an occasional confusion.)

Embarrassment plays no role in this, the issue is confusion and if you do not decide to rename the thing, then you get another discussion like this in a few months and then again and again and again and again. The recurring rename proposals and heated debates are the best proof a rename is needed. Long overdue, but the still necessary.

[openstrike]

@arnesom: As someone actively developing with Perl (5) and with no interest in Perl6/Raku permit me to assuage your fears on these points:

As to possible haters of Perl 6 on the Perl 5 camp, they could think that the damage has been done and nothing would change that.

The damage has been done but there is a simple way to mitigate and minimise future damage and that is to change the name as @lizmat has proposed here. By not changing the name the prevailing misinformed view that "Perl6" is somehow just the new version of Perl and everyone must upgrade would continue unabated. We don't want that.

A new name could even antagonise them further;

So long as the new name doesn't contain the string "Perl" then it won't. Trust me; it really, really, really won't. If this proposal is accepted, and by the old gods and the new I pray that it does, then we Perlers will have an almighty party - and you Rakuists will all be welcome.

[zaucker]

Seems the trolls are starting to come to this discussion :-(

[moritz]

For the record, I like the "Perl" name in "Perl 6".

(Nothing in this comment is very new; I just wanted to state my opinion, since I'm on the reviewer list of a potential name change pull request, and don't want people to be surprised).

Perl 6 is a language in the Perl family, and it shows in many aspects: the familiar syntax with sigils, the focus on Regexes / text processing, the design principles of DWIM, simple things should be easy, hard things should be possible, Huffman coding of names and so on.

I came to Perl 6 through the Perl 5 community, and see the many benefits that come from that connection: easier flow of contributors and users, existing organizational infrastructure (TPF), conferences, workshops, forums and so on. (If we changed the name to something that didn't contain Perl, for how long can we take for granted that TPF will manage Perl 6 grants, for example?)

As mentioned in a previous comment, one of the criteria for a frequently-used name is that it's short. camelia has four syllables, so the new, proposed name falls short (pun intended). I haven't heard a name proposal that I like better though.

I'm well aware of the downsides and the historical baggage of the Perl name, but in my assessment, the positive aspects outweigh them.

Finally, we have tried a partial rename (by adding the raku alias) before, and the uptake seem to have been pretty low. An attempted rename as the risk of not sticking, thus not providing significant upsides, while still having some of the downsides (more name confusion, potentially being excluded from perl conferences / workshops / organizations).

[lizmat]

@moritz

If we changed the name to something that didn't contain Perl, for how long can we take for granted that TPF will manage Perl 6 grants, for example?

It should be noted that "The Perl Foundation" is in fact the "Yet Another Society" doing business as "The Perl Foundation". Initial thoughts about adding another "doing business as" named "The Raku Foundation" have been suggested by a TPF board member already. So I don't think anything needs to change there. Please keep in mind that the name change of "Perl 6" to "Raku" is just that. A name change. The Perl mindset heritage will never be disavowed.

Finally, we have tried a partial rename (by adding the raku alias) before, and the uptake seem to have been pretty low.

That's because using "Raku" as an alias (of which the precise intended use was never stipulated by Larry), is in a way the worst of both worlds: it is bad because it still explicitly links to "Perl 6", and it is bad because it still squats in the "Perl 5" name.

I've stated this before: I think we should treat the name change as a family member coming out of the closet. The person hasn't changed, the person can just show to be what they feel they are. In a good family, that should not change any of the other relationships.

[moritz]

@lizmat

Please keep in mind that the name change of "Perl 6" to "Raku" is just that. A name change. The Perl mindset heritage will never be disavowed

I simply don't see how that works. Dropping the "Perl" from the language name is more like changing your family name than your given name -- it's explicitly disavowing the Perl heritage.

You have to do some real mental gymnastics to point at a pull request titled "Perl" in the name "Perl 6" is confusing and irritating and the same time continue to embrace the Perl brand, organizations and heritage. If Perl is so great, why is it confusing, irritating and needing to get rid of? Why associate with Perl in everything but the name?

I think you can't have it both ways, and if you try to have it both ways, chances are you lose both ways.

[1nickt]

_Seems the trolls are starting to come to this discussion :-(_

Please STOP right there. You don't know the history, and you don't use 'trolling' correctly. It is not trolling to disagree.

I have personally been accused in the last several years dozens of times of 'trolling' for saying the exact same things the author of this PR has finally stated. In many cases by her. You are triggering my PTSD just as I am trying to participate in as peaceful and harmonious a celebration as possible of this long overdue bifurcation.

I do not think Raku is very Perlish. I find the language itself unappealing. I do not think there is a single community (except for a tiny echo chamber). I think that TPF went off the rails and has been a large part of perpetuating the stalemate. I think "Perl" conferences need to be completely reimagined and returned to their roots, i.e. mostly focussed on teaching, training and sharing Perl, not socializing and yakking about other things that each have their own conferences anyway. I expect that once the rename is complete and Raku strikes out on its own at last, I and most working professional Perl programmers will have nothing more to do with it or its community than they do when needing to integrate to an app in any other language. I bear Raku and its community no further ill will, but I can't wait to see the back of it walking away.

If you think the above is trolling, rather than stating a dissenting opinion, then ... [_invective snipped here_]

[AlexDaniel]

As @jnthn noted previously, many new comments still come with useful information, so locking the thread is somewhat unfortunate. That being said, I've been waking up to a pageful of notifications for the last few days and it's hard to keep up with this, especially when you're trying to find the good bits. I'm locking this thread temporarily, and I'll unlock it in about a week. Org owners (jnthn, lizmat, etc.) can still leave comments here, and I'm sure they'll keep us updated on the progress for this issue.

[lizmat]

Dropping the "Perl" from the language name is more like changing your family name than your given name -- it's explicitly disavowing the Perl heritage.

That's not the way I see it. The Perl mindset occurs in many places in the world. Many languages have taken Perl mindset features and incorporated them into their own. Regardless of their name.

I understand you are proud of the Perl heritage. So am I. But I would like to see many more people be users of the Perl mindset, and currently the "Perl" part is inhibiting that. So I'd rather change the name (which is just a label after all) and get more mindshare, then be proud of "Perl" with fewer and fewer people.

And this is apart of the squatting issue, which a rename will also solve.

If Perl is so great, why is it confusing, irritating and needing to get rid of? Why associate with Perl in everything but the name?

Did you read Damian Conway's, Peter Scott's or Curtis Poe's comments? I think they describe very well what we should achieve. And as Perl book writers, I have them in high esteem, as I do you!

I think you can't have it both ways, and if you try to have it both ways, chances are you lose both ways.

Yes, there are risks involved. Known and unknown risks. But if the comments have indicated anything to me so far, is that many people are at least willing to give the benefit of the doubt to a name change.

On the other hand, I only see the certainty of a further decline of the "Perl" brand in general, and a growing weight around the neck of the "Perl 6" name. And that's a certainty I for sure, will not longer be a part of.

[JJ]

El vie., 16 ago. 2019 a las 15:15, Elizabeth Mattijsen (<
[email protected]>) escribió:

Dropping the "Perl" from the language name is more like changing your
family name than your given name -- it's explicitly disavowing the Perl
heritage.

That's not the way I see it. The Perl mindset occurs in many places in the
world. Many languages have taken Perl mindset features and incorporated
them into their own. Regardless of their name.

Just check out @Jonathan Worthington [e-mail] keynote in Perlcon.
Even in concurrency, and under whatever name, Raku/Camelia/Perl6 has "perl"
written all over it. It's a member of the family.

[moritz]

@lizmat I still think the you can't have it both ways applies.

The reason for the rename proposal is a problem with general perception, which isn't very nuanced.

For this not-so-nuanced general perception, we have to make an either/or distinction: is Perl 6 still Perl, or isn't it? If we drop Perl from the name, then we decide against the Perl heritage in the public mind, even if a select core group of code historians know The Real Truth.

And I am fairly certain that if we do that, this decision will be used against Perl 6 even in the broader Perl community, and I don't think we have the clout to replace everything we lose through that backslash.

That said, I'm closer to changing my mind than I thought I would be. I'll try to keep an open mind.

[masak]

For what it's worth, I agree with @moritz. There are irrevocable consequences to dropping the "Perl" name entirely; that whether we _intend_ it as "admitting defeat" or not, whether we _intend_ it as "not being Perl any more", will surely be _taken_ as such by a significant number of onlookers and people not in the Perl community. What's more, (I fear) it'll be a narrative we mostly can't control.

I'm still mostly OK with the rename, or at least amicably resigned to it. But "hey, Perl 6 decided to not be associated with Perl anymore and be a totally different language" sounds _exactly_ like the kind of telephone game that would result from this. Maybe it can be mitigated by well-written blog posts. Maybe not.

[lizmat]

Perl 6 decided to not be associated with Perl anymore and be a totally different language

That's why I think the amicable "divorce" of the name, freeing the "Perl" name, should be emphasized.

[moritz]

That's why I think the amicable "divorce" of the name, freeing the "Perl" name, should be emphasized.

What we emphasize and what we don't will get lost completely in the lack of nuance in awareness that most people will have about this.

[masak]

Source: every other thing that's happened inside of the Perl 6 community and been distorted and misrepresented by the outside.

[lizmat]

What we emphasize and what we don't will get lost completely in the lack of nuance in awareness that most people will have about this.

Perhaps.

every other thing that's happened inside of the Perl 6 community and been distorted and misrepresented by the outside.

But a large part of that was caused by unhappy Perl 5 community members. Which I hope, will not be the case this time, at least not at previously observed levels.

[moritz]

Comment from @Juerd (via IRC, #perl6):

".code" is confusing with ".codes" on strings, and JJ is wrong that "rnd" is uncommon; it's a common extension for files with random data.

[AlexDaniel]

@Juerd yeah, you're right, and as it says currently in the PR:

Renaming to .code currently clashes with CallFrame.code, and visually
clashes with the .codes method. Renaming CallFrame.code to
CallFrame.codeobj and .codes to .codepoints appears to be an option
to be discussed further.

And the rnd idea is just that, a new idea, it's not part of the PR (yet, and I guess it won't happen).

[ugexe]

I find it concerning the risks have not been enumerated beyond random comments. The problem leads with a bunch of Pros and ignores listing the Cons (and sure some Cons would theoretically need to be discovered via the PR process, but not all) -- would you have faith in such a project plan? Or more importantly -- will all 13 reviewers have faith in such a project plan? Backwards compatibility hasn't been mentioned a single time beyond throwing the word 'deprecate' around.

[masak]

@ugexe Backwards compatibility, in what sense? How can a rename of a language be made backwards compatible?

[ugexe]

@masak we have maintained backwards compatibility for installed modules... some of us have had to bend over backwards to do so. Regardless I don't find "a rename cannot be backwards compatible" to be self-evident, and thus should be listed as a risk as the very least.

[lizmat]

1. zef does not change its name
2. zef does not change its interface
3. zef uses information from META6.json only
4. zef depends on core internals to install modules
5. the core internals know how to handle old and new extensions
6. the $*REPO is responsible for allowing what a valid module is (regardless of file extension)

So I think we should be able to allow for backward compatibility with previously installed modules?

[masak]

I don't... so much question whether a rename can be backwards compatible, as honestly wonder what it would even _mean_ for it to be so.

I'm fully familiar with what it means for releases of a piece of software to be backwards compatible. What, to you, does it mean in this context, with a language and a new name? Can you point to a concrete observable that determines whether the rename was backwards compatible or not?

[ugexe]

I have not raised zef as a concern.

Just because the internals can be taught to accept a new extension does not mean that removing extensions will Just Work. One of the main guidelines we've followed in the module space of rakudo is that installed code should continue to work. So some rudimentary questions: what are the sources of the sha1s in various respects? What happens when how these are calculated change after they've already been installed?

[lizmat]

what are the sources of the sha1s in various respects? What happens when how these are calculated change after they've already been installed?

Wouldn't that just force a (perhaps unnecessary) re-precompilation?

[ugexe]

Do installed modules get re-precompiled? Or just CURFS based ones? Either way -- if we have to ask then there is clearly risk here.

However I did not pop in here to enumerate the risks -- this was only a quick example off the top of my head. My concern, again, is that risks are not really enumerated period. If nobody can think of any risks to list alongside theoretical positive benefits then I have very little confidence that individuals have considered the pros and cons appropriately.

[lizmat]

Do installed modules get re-precompiled?

Any bump in rakudo should cause a re-precompilation, regardless of which REPO it is in. And a language change would be a bump in rakudo, I'd think. Or am I missing something? Please, be blunt: my understanding of the issue is probably incomplete.

[ugexe]

Lets assume that specific mention is not a real problem. Are there really 0 other risks involved? Or do we simply not wish to enumerate them in one spot along with the list of pros? I don't plan on constructing a list of risks myself, but if somewhere were trying to convince me to be in favor of some plan I would expect the risks to be listed alongside the benefits. And I would be wary of a plan that does not claim to have any possible risks.

[lizmat]

@ugexe So you're basically asking for a SWOT analysis? That would be different from the current document, but it could be made a separate document :-)

[niner]

There are backwards compatibility risks like perl6 being used in shebang lines, scripts, .spec files and other packaging helpers. E.g. on all our servers we include openSUSE's devel:languages:perl6 repository. perl6 is used in our puppet config. There are tools for generating .spec files which hard code perl6.

Maintaining backwards compatibility would in this example mean to install a bin/perl6 (symlink) in addition to a bin/raku.

There are lots and lots of .pm6 and .p6 in private repositories and deployed on servers. Because lets face it: Perl 6 is in use in production and has been for years. I don't think hurting our most faithful users would be good for our karma.

[lizmat]

@niner are you saying we should support perl6 and .pm and .pm6 extensions indefinitely? If not, what do you think would be a good deprecation period?

[JJ]

Old versions of perl6 would still be available. With the merging of the
main node.js and io.js, io.js is still available and downloadable. I don't
think it's really necessary the language itself supports them, as long as
there's way of making sure old versions are available (and hot patches are
performed on them). I mean, no one is going to systematically delete all
Rakudo star distributions available on Internet. If anyone wants all the
new goodies, well, update to raku.

[lizmat]

~A radical idea that occurred to me yesterday, is that we could treat the rename as a fork. Aka, keep all of the current stuff in the same place, but stop maintaining it (except maybe for security issues). And thus make a change for current users to be an opt-in, rather than it being forced upon them.~

Strike that, a bad idea.

[JJ]

El mié., 21 ago. 2019 a las 10:47, Elizabeth Mattijsen (<
[email protected]>) escribió:

A radical idea that occurred to me yesterday, is that we could treat the
rename as a fork. Aka, keep all of the current stuff in the same place, but
stop maintaining it (except maybe for security issues). And thus make a
change for current users to be an opt-in, rather than it being forced upon
them.

My proposal for documentation was exactly along those lines, mainly for
search engine optimization purposes. After all, people are not going to
stop searching for "how to do x in Perl 6" overnight. A deprecation notice,
with a deadline, would be in order, anyway.

[lizmat]

But wouldn't that just be keeping an older version / branch of the documentation alive as a website somewhere?

[rba]

We seriously have think if we like to have two versions of the websites, e.g. docs.*.org keeping alive.
Technically a redirect would be the easiest, then hosting the same content under both "hostnames". Keeping two different copies of "the same" alive might be difficult.

[JJ]

El mié., 21 ago. 2019 a las 11:08, Elizabeth Mattijsen (<
[email protected]>) escribió:

But wouldn't that just be keeping an older version / branch of the
documentation alive as a website somewhere?

Right. With some note in every page, pointing to the new version, and a
deprecation notice indicating when that's ending.

[JJ]

El mié., 21 ago. 2019 a las 11:12, Roman Baumer ([e-mail])
escribió:

We seriously have think if we like to have two versions of the websites,
e.g. docs.*.org keeping alive.
Technically a redirect would be the easiest, then hosting the same content
under both "hostnames". Keeping two different copies of "the same" alive
might be difficult.

It wouldn't be the same by any means.

• "Old" version is frozen, has a note pointing to the new version,
  equivalent page if avaialble.
• New version keeps evolving.

Eventually, old version, in 6 months from release, is simply a redirect. We
need a transition period where the two versions would coexist.

[rba]

Websites
Fine for me for docs.perl6.org.

Proposed procedure for:

• perl6.org: A note on top of the site, and a delayed redirect to the raku site.
• modules.perl6.org: A redirect permanent to modules.<raku domain>. Will this break something?
• design.perl6.org: Keep it as it is. No domain name change. Eventually make design.<raku domain> available with same content?
• marketing.perl6.org: Keep it as it is.

Please help me with the proposed procedure for other *.perl6.org websites. As they have not been online again.

[jnthn]

Generally, if going for a rename, we should try to minimize the inconvenience for those who have already been using Perl 6 in production, developed modules for Perl 6, and so forth. Meaning things like:

• Support for the pm and pm6 extensions support probably needs to stay around for a relatively long time (years). Don't underestimate the number of -Ilib usages that will be out there in production!
• Installing as perl6 probably needs to stay for a shorter while (months - a year), before becoming a Configure-time option for a while
• Similarly, the Perl and $*PERL classes would just be aliased under Raku, perhaps with which one is the alias changing at a language version change
• Module authors should be allowed to migrate at their own pace. I have a lot of Perl 6 modules. Chances are if there's rename follow-up work to do (e.g. adopting new file extensions, renaming the repo), it'll happen when I was going to do something else on the module anyway. I most certainly don't want to wake up some day to a flood of "please change X" issues (or PRs) for them all.
• We shouldn't be pushy in encouraging folks to adopt new file extensions etc. Even if module installation were to work out (we should check that), editors and other tooling will take much longer. Folks should switch then they're ready. (And if module installation won't work out with a new file extension, we might even need a period where we support it, but aren't actively encouraging its adoption yet.)

I don't think arguing that folks should just stick with older Rakudo versions until they can update their codebase is too helpful; I figure quite a few follow latest releases for fixes and performance improvements, and I don't think we should use that carrot as a stick for folks to hurry up and change stuff.

At $dayjob I have a principle of "care about the customers you have over running after new ones". Similarly, if pushing ahead with a rename, we should make sure to care about the users we already have along the way.

[niner]

As a module author I try to support rakudo versions as far back as possible and also take care to make my code run on possible future versions. In Inline::Perl5 for example I use nqp to feed the multi dispatch cache, but since nqp is not a supported API, I do this in EVALed code and fall back to less advanced code if it should ever fail. It will be slower but at least keep working.

I'm quite sure that other authors see it similarly, so with any deprecated interface like the .pm6 extension or $*PERL variable, we will need to give them about as long a transition period as any of them will want. Years seem appropriate.

With regards to websites we really should not throw away any search engine mojo we have. It's better to keep old domains around, mark the new ones as canonical and keep any existing URIs working by way of redirecting and using Google's webmaster tools. This is the point where I really wish Zoffix++ would come back. His experience would be worth a lot.

[lizmat]

@ugexe I've added a SWOT analysis at https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/89/files#diff-41c2d465640a7249d1be7c966bcb1628 . Suggestions / comments / additions welcome.

[CIAvash]

I am repeating what I said during the aliasing discussions because I see some people talk/think about the name only from the reputation angle.

In my experience, whenever I've talked about Perl 6 to people who are not in the community, I ended up explaining its relation with Perl 5. Because when you say Perl 6, what they read/hear is Perl version 6(can you blame them?). After explaining, they may understand or may wonder why it's called Perl 6 if it is a different language, then you can either shrug or explain the history. From what I've heard, there are others who have had similar experiences. It can be tiring.

I'm just going to share one particular experience that I found interesting:

About 3 years ago, I added Perl 6 to AlternativeTo.net. It was removed the next day. After asking them why they removed it, I got this response:

The application Perl 6 was removed because it already exists on AlternativeTo with the name Perl.

As you can read in our FAQ, we usually do not allow different versions of the same product separately, we think it's much easier for the user if we only list one entry with the generic name of the product, but you can add info about Perl 6 in the existing description

To which I replied:

Perl 6 is not a new version of Perl, it's a different language, with its own logo, website, developers, community and features. It's not going to replace Perl(5). The development of Perl(5) will continue independently.

And included a few links to clear things up. Also keep in mind that "Perl 6 is a member of the Perl family of programming languages." was already in the description. Then they replied:

Since Perl 6 is a fork of Perl, it can be approved.

And asked me to re-add the Perl 6 page. Maybe it's because I'm not good at explaining, but it seems they thought the Perl 6 community forked Perl and are now doing their own thing. So they approved it and added a note similar to my explanation in order to prevent further confusion. I don't think it should be this hard to talk about the name of a programming language.

How the community sees things is very different from how outsiders see them.

[ugexe]

...and yet we have multiple people (including new people like one of our GSoC students) that have admitted they wouldn't have joined Perl 6 without the Perl reputation.

[kentfredric]

These days, that people get a "good" opinion of perl through their social circles is the exception to the rule. There are far more people with an (unformed) negative opinion of perl out there who are priming people to join them, than there are people with a positive opinion of perl.

When you add to that "uninformed" group the growing number of people who have reasonable objections to the way Perl 5 is headed, the future looks increasingly glum for anything with the word "perl" associated with it.

Articles like this will likely add more people to this planet who associate "perl" with something that's going the way of the dodo, that they can't even hope to use in production. ( So many things about this article make me rage, but they're too off-topic to mention )

[AlexDaniel]

Also, I don't see what would stop those who are well informed about perl5 to consider its sibling Raku.

[vrurg]

...and yet we have multiple people (including new people like one of our GSoC students) that have admitted they wouldn't have joined Perl 6 without the Perl reputation.

Many of us could say "I known somebody ..." for both pro and con. Personal examples are now useful in making decisions. Statistics is what matters. And in this case, I'm afraid, the statistics tells us that outsider prevail by orders of magnitude.

[ugexe]

And in this case, I'm afraid, the statistics tells us that outsider prevail by orders of magnitude.

Where are the (rough) statistics, and what order of magnitude does it represent? Or are arm chair statistics sufficient? Sure, we can say more people have voiced one way or the other... but orders of magnitude? This is the type of hyperbole that does more harm than good.

[vrurg]

I'm not considering this a hyperbole. Take the size of Perl community including businesses involved. Take the overall number of developers and businesses involved into programming one way or another. Compare. I'd be surprised if the ration would be less than 1 to 100.

[vrurg]

And, BTW, to clarify my position. If you look above at my first comment in this thread, I mentioned that I personally don't really care about the name. I still don't. It would change nothing to me if renaming won't happen. Moreover, it would spare a lot of resources for the development.

More than that, I didn't like the name Raku back then, last year, when it was first seriously proposed.

But now, considering all the reasons, I'd rather support renaming than not.

[ugexe]

Take the size of Perl community including businesses involved. Take the overall number of developers and businesses involved into programming one way or another. Compare.

This is not the same thing as an orders of magnitude number of developers not being able to discern the difference between perl and perl6, so I don't understand the point you are trying to make other than assuming all non-perl developers are clueless.

[Grinnz]

so I don't understand the point you are trying to make other than assuming all non-perl developers are clueless.

It's not that black and white, but yes, many programmers are not well informed about every programming language they don't use. They rely on what other people say and what appearance tells them.

[kentfredric]

I think the suggested problem is more that, the number of people who have positive opinions associated with "perl" is probably at most 10x the number of people who use perl, while the number of people who don't use perl (but still use a language in a similar niche) is probably closer to 10,000x the number of people who use perl.

If even 5% of these people are disposed to project negative opinions every time its mentioned, that's an unfavourable ratio of 5:1 anti:pro as far as the collective social awareness is concerned.

Starting with a fresh name at least eliminates the "anti" audience and they have to start over at 0, and it will take much more time for them to outstrip the languages users, giving that new language an opportunity to develop a fresh set of perceptions for itself.

[ugexe]

is probably at most 10x the number of people who use perl

based on what?

is probably closer to 10,000x the number of people who use perl.

based on what?

---

Not trying to be difficult, but I find it hard to swallow all these numbers being thrown around based on hunches and assumptions.

[tony-o]

Perhaps some concrete numbers of people with negative opinions of perl6 because of perl (or any actual numbers at all) would solidify or put this argument to rest. Right now it's based entirely on speculation and the argument of if every one person tells one other person is meaningless without some sort of actual basis or number.

@kentfredric that's not how percentages or ratios work. 5% is a ratio of 1:19 (5:95), the 19 number being not-anti (which is not the same thing as being pro).

[MasterDuke17]

I'm not intending to express an opinion either way with this comment, but the 2018 and 2017 Stackoverflow surveys have Perl as the 8th most dreaded language to work with, it's 10th in 2016, and 7th in 2015. However, it isn't even on the list in the 2019 survey (whatever that means).

[Grinnz]

Not trying to be difficult, but I find it hard to swallow all these numbers being thrown around based on hunches and assumptions.

I'm not sure what you expect people to present aside from anecdotes as you have done yourself. It's clear that you do not have the same experiences that others this thread do, so discussing that difference further is of no benefit.

[tony-o]

@Grinnz a link to something with actual numbers on it would further a discussion about statistics rather than presenting anecdotes as facts or doing pseudo-statistics on said anecdotes.

[ugexe]

I'm not sure what you expect people to present aside from anecdotes as you have done yourself. It's clear that you do not have the same experiences that others this thread do, so discussing that difference further is of no benefit.

I am not quantifying things -- no one is arguing people don't have anecdotal evidence. That is not nearly the same as claiming to have quantified something.

[vrurg]

This is not the same thing as an orders of magnitude number of developers not being able to discern the difference between perl and perl6, so I don't understand the point you are trying to make other than assuming all non-perl developers are clueless.

In a way I could agree with your last statement except that I'd better use word underinformed. Just try a thought experiment and think of the youngsters who started with Python or JS. How much info do they get from outside of their info-bubble? I'd be damned if I knew what is the difference between ES7 and older JS versions wouldn't I need it for one of my work projects. And even now I can hardly remember anything besides await and class. You want them to draw distinctive line between Perl5 and Perl6? Really?

But it is not programmers who sign the paychecks. You think people running businesses are that much involved with what's going on inside a group they consider marginal?

It worth remembering that we're living inside our own bubbles alongside with people living within their own bubbles. Those exists on purpose because one need to manage that flood of information he/she receives everyday. Anything unrelated gets filtered out unless it's a wave of hype (either good or bad) which can just break through the bubble walls.

So, what basically happens is that a lot of people who knew about Perl that it is bad, they use this as a filter to skip just about _any_ Perl-related info floating around, not matter what kind of info it is.

Anyway. I don't think I can convince you. I see your point, I don't like the fact that we need renaming and this is where we intersect in our views. But my experience tells me that what I don't like is not necessarily what is good for the project.

[vrurg]

BTW, here is some rather old statistics. I don't think much has changed since then: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/31/perl_most_hated_language/

[ajs]

Starting with a fresh name at least eliminates the "anti" audience

@kentfredric I've seen many organizations try to accomplish this with a name change. Bottom line: it doesn't work. If you call the language "X" then you'll just hear a lot of "X is the new name for Perl". You won't have control over that process, and the only way you will shed the negative views of Perl is to demonstrate that you have escaped the conditions that caused them or that it no longer matters. That's a long, slow process.

[jubilatious1]

Short note here: @jnthn said he was keeping an eye on reactions, including thumbs-ups ( 👍 ).

Jonathan, @lizmat and others should know that since this issue was locked about a week ago, only "Members" have been able to add reaction emoticons. So it might take a day or two for the wider (non-"Member") community to check the thread--and add a reaction to individual posts.

[AlexDaniel]

@jubilatious1 even members were unable to add reactions. We know about the issue.

[Grinnz]

You won't have control over that process, and the only way you will shed the negative views of Perl is to demonstrate that you have escaped the conditions that caused them or that it no longer matters. That's a long, slow process.

A process which has been stalled while two languages try to share the name.

[lizmat]

to demonstrate that you have escaped the conditions that caused them or that it no longer matters. That's a long, slow process.

Which is even longer, slower and more acrimonious with the name "Perl 6". That much has become clear to me from the past 3.5 years since the Christmas release, working both on the internals as well as doing promo work with the Perl 6 Weekly, and going to a lot of Perl and general Open Source events.

I don't think anybody said a name change was going to make it easy. I see it more as a way to stack the deck so that both languages will have a fighting chance in the future. No success is guaranteed. Only the odds will be better, IMO, which is why I started this issue.

[nxadm]

I've seen many organizations try to accomplish this with a name change. Bottom line: it doesn't work. If you call the language "X" then you'll just hear a lot of "X is the new name for Perl".

The plan is to rename Perl 6, not Perl 5 (where your analogy would apply). It's a different product with the same name, a whole new level of confusion. What Perl (5) people do, is up to them to decide.

[kentfredric]

@ajs

I've seen many organizations try to accomplish this with a name change. Bottom line: it doesn't work.

To some extent I'm in agreement, however, there's a defining characteristic in common with where it failed in the cases I saw: They were all already big major established names with dominant positions and user bases, and they were performing a rebrand.

Naturally, the people who are their established customers and the people who by necessity have to use them in reference in a daily basis, are going to have this past/future association develop.

I don't think the Perl 6 situation is equivalent to these.

Average folk being able to correlate "raku" to "some iteration of perl" is hardly the problem we're worried about happening, given the current problem is that people who know that "perl" is a thing aren't adequately informed to know that "perl 6" is not something they should consider to be an iteration of "perl 5".

We're starting off in a position where our target audience are essentially naive about what the reality of the ecosystem is, and if they were so informed as to know that "raku is perl 6 but not perl 5", well, that's like, the opposite of the problem we have today. ( The problem we have today being people don't know that perl 6 is not perl 5 )

[kentfredric]

Another way to put it, is its really about "initial perceptions".

When people do a "rebrand", it has to be a publicised event in one way or another, but we're not really aiming for a rebrand, we're not really an established name, we've been borrowing an established name.

When it comes to an "unknown", people aren't given the opportunity to form many initial perceptions.

When something is called "perl 6", people will attribute to it the perceptions associated with "perl", before they do any honest investigation into the reality.

So, in order for people to develop the negative associations of "perl" when they see "raku" mentioned for the first time, they'll at least have to either:

a. Do some honest background research to reach the conclusion that "its just another perl, and we hate perl"
b. Have somebody explicitly point it out to them.

Part a raises the bar for forming ill-informed initial perceptions somewhat, and part b requires the general programming community to be in itself, collectively informed about how raku traces its origins back through perl.

But the programming community has demonstrated that it is not collectively informed about such matters, that's why insiders have to repeatedly explain to people the seperation between "perl 6" and "perl 5".

So it seems the overwhelming source of initial perceptions today are gated exclusively by the name, not by any deeper, more honest evaluation.

[pmurias]

When it comes to an "unknown", people aren't given the opportunity to form many initial perceptions.

I would assume an "unknown" niche programming language starts from a fairly negative initial perception.
Escaping being classified as a "dead technology" is a huge benefit, but being treated as something brand new and irrelevant isn't great either.
I wouldn't worry about the (possibly super vocal) minority of people who have actually used Perl 5 and actively hate it, being polarizing is a good thing.

[nige123]

Just wanted to add a legal point in favour of 'Perl' + 'raku'.

It's important from a legal perspective that the Artistic Licence 2.0 works in conjunction with strong registered trade marks (i.e., Perl® + Raku® ) owned by the same entity (i.e., TPF). The copyright clauses of the Artistic Licence 2.0 are relatively permissive but the trade mark and logo clause is not (see clause 12).

This helps protect the language from being forked and appropriated by miscellaneous MegaCorp. Admittedly, right now this seems far fetched, but the combination of copyright and trademark protection provides a good legal foundation for the language.

The Perl® trademark alone does not work as well as having a second trademark for raku® . Apple use a similar branding strategy: Apple® + iPhone®.

A brand is like a goodwill battery - soaking up associations. It also, importantly, acts as a legal badge of origin - raku® will help create a distinctive legal identity for the language.

[nxadm]

@nige123 That pretty much kills every advantage of the renaming for Perl 5 and Perl 6 at the same time.

[nige123]

I think it's likely that Perl 5 will want to create its own distinctive sub-brand if/when raku is adopted. There is nothing apocalyptic about this - it's just what naturally happens when brands + products grow (e.g., Apple iPhone and Apple iPad). Generally Perl needs a branding strategy that makes room for growth for all Perl languages, projects, conferences etc

Incidentally I'm collecting sub-brand names and suggestions for Perl 5.

[nxadm]

@lizmat put it more eloquently, but in my view the only way to give a fighting chance to prosper to both languages comes down to:

• Perl 6 to distance it self of the Perl brand in order to be evaluated as a new language and not as a dead version of an old language (sadly, that's the dominant narrative outside of the Perl bubble).
• Perl 5 to reclaim the exclusive hold of the Perl brand in order to reinvent itself and stop the decline. As long a "new version" is out there, it's a loosing battle.

I understand however that the discussion may be nonsensical if you think Perl 6 is a popular language an/or that historical Perl is not in decline. Furthermore, there is no warranty whatsoever that the endeavors after the renaming will be successful. However, they just might. Everything else looks to me as the 6-monthly rehashing of the same discussion, with each time with less participants and, probably, less users.

[ugexe]

Curious how you suggest Perl 5 can save the Perl brand while simultaneously suggesting Perl 6 cannot. Either the brand is tainted and unsalvageable or it is not.

Comments that appear to be talking out both sides their mouth encourage me to disregard any points one might be making.

[nxadm]

@ugexe Simple. Because for the world, Perl means Perl 5.

[nige123]

Branding is about associations. The associations that endure are the honest ones.

There are many good associations with Perl - that help to honestly describe the language (e.g., Larry, TMTOWTDI, pragmatic, community, get your job done etc). We should keep these good associations. There are some negative ones too (e.g., write only, large codebases turn into a steaming pile of Perl etc) - fortunately Perl 6/raku is dealing with a lot of this by design - and this is something we need to associate with raku.

I'm not advocating calling the language "Perl Raku".

Just that we should have no problem associating "Perl" and "Raku" in the same sentence. Not least because it's an efficient way to communicate what the origins of the language are. People will see through the Jedi mind-trick, "Raku is not really related to Perl" and it will backfire badly. Let's be honest + clear - the brand will be better for it.

[Ovid]

When dealing with trademarks, there's a concept called "confusing similarity". If a product name
is considered "confusingly similar" to an existing trademark, the courts will usually argue that the product must change its name. Why? Because the consumers get confused about what they're buying. This problem is so well-known that there's a saying in marketing: "a confused customer buys nothing."

Outside the Perl community, the name "Perl" is damaged goods. Period. If raku/camelia wants to spread her wings, being tarred by the Perl brush doesn't help. By definition, people brought _into_ a community were first _outside_ the community and the people outside our community don't have a positive view of Perl.

This view is slowly abating, but it's because newer programmers sometimes haven't heard of Perl, or know nothing about Perl even if they've heard the name. They may have stumbled across a Perl script that ships with an operating system and run screaming in horror because that Perl is often crap. It's the same feeling I get when I see some awful bash script driving functionality I rely on.

For extra fun, hit Google for "Perl is X" and substitute X for a particular attitude. It's not encouraging. People inside the Perl community need to just buck up and admit that the perception problem is with people outside the community and what they regularly say is:

1. The upgrade language, "Perl 6", is two decades and waiting (that's if they've ever heard of it)
2. Perl hasn't had an upgrade in 25 years
3. Perl is "write-only"
4. Perl is dead

And point 2 above is a misconception because people outside the community believe points 3 and 4 so they don't care to investigate further. Why would they when, to them, it's obvious that Perl is never going to be upgraded? It doesn't matter that they're wrong; what matters is that this is their perception. And that perception isn't helped by them not knowing or caring whether Perl 6 is an upgrade to Perl 5 or not. Further, there are people in the Perl 6 community who still suggest that Perl 6 _should be_ the future of Perl 5. Frankly, I think they're right in that Perl 6 is manifestly a better language, but they're wrong because many in the Perl 5 community like their language and have no interest into going gently into that good night.

So long as "Perl 6" has Perl in its name, the rancor will continue inside the Perl community, the confusion will continue outside the Perl community, and everyone is going to suffer for it.

There is only one question really left to ask, and it's not a question we're willing to face: is it too late? I don't believe it is, but if we drag our feet forever, it may be.

[ugexe]

For extra fun, hit Google for "Perl is X" and substitute X for a particular attitude.

For brevity I did this with other languages, and the results were the same:

Ruby is dead, Golang is for idiots, Rust lang is [bad|dead], Coffeescript is dead. The only ones that had no negative connotations were C[#|++]?

[pjscott]

One thing I want to add: Perl 6 is a language designed to last a hundred years. I firmly believe that it could. Whatever decision we make now should be constrained not by what has happened in the last 3 years, 19 years, or 33 years, but by what we would like to happen in a much longer timeframe in the future.

[JendaPerl]

Thanks for a good laugh pjscott. Designed to last a hundred years. That's a better joke than "640k ought to be enough for anybody."
Unless it was meant to last a hundred years to finally get implemented.

BTW, I'm still waiting for a manifestation of Perl 6 being "manifestly a better language", unless the thing it's supposed to be better for is golf and obfu.

[Grinnz]

@JendaPerl If you have nothing constructive to say to the topic, please do not comment.

[shishini]

My 2 cents

1. If you are rebranding to make the language more appealing, pick the nicer name, Camelia a is nicer name than Raku, that being said, I dont think Raku is a bad name, and I kind of like that the language will be called Raku, and the interpreter wiIl be called Raku-Do, I just think Camelia is nicer name

2. Postpone the renaming until a major feature is added, or a major issue is fixed (speed, and performance) , renaming without either will be a lot less effective

[lizmat]

For future reference, other comments:

• Hacker News
• /r/perl
• /r/perl6
• PerlMonks
• The Register
• Lobsters
• Slashdot
• Developpez.com
• Heise.de
• OpenNet.ru
• Blognone.net
• I-Programmer
• Technologik.fr
• SD Times
• Packt

[iandinwoodie]

As someone who does not use Perl, and has no predisposition to Perl, I thought it may be worthwhile to share my thoughts (i.e., the thoughts of a naive outsider):

1. Before I read through this entire issue and all of its comments, I had thought that Perl 6 was just the successor to Perl 5 (similar to the way that Python 3 is the successor to Python 2).

2. Renaming Perl 6 to something else to give it its own identity (e.g., Camelia or Raku) seems like the clearest path to remedy the common misconception that Perl 6 is Perl 5’s successor.

3. A Perl 6 rename would have me think of the relationship between Perl 5 and Camelia (or Raku) similar to that of Java and Kotlin (instead of that of Python 2 and Python 3).

[whistlegraph]

🦋I propose you call the language Butterfly. It would be exceedingly cute and the Perl 6 Camelia logo is already adorable. There are so many different paradigms in Perl 6 that it's hard to grok what the language really is without looking at it up close, similar to how different butterfly species have decoration on their wings to hide their true form.👐

I have a green t-shirt with the Camelia logo on it and everywhere I wear it non-programmers and creative types always ask me about it, which is a great sign that the identity is sound and the butterfly image is attractive.

[kentfredric]

:butterfly: I propose you call the language Butterfly.

That'd confuse emacs users.

[jonjensen]

+1 to changing the name of Perl 6 to Raku.

That would free up Perl 5 to later jump over version number 6 and go to 7, similarly to what PHP did to good effect. Yes, it's all marketing, but yes, that's important and matters.

I like the name Camelia, but as others have pointed out, it would be a neverending misspelling problem, and shorter names really help with languages.

[nxadm]

butterfly I propose you call the language Butterfly.

That'd confuse emacs users.

Now, with an xkcd cartoon, this thread reached completion :).

[m0llusk]

When rakudo came to the Perl 6 distribution toying with parser generation gave me as much joy as any programming experience I have ever had. Such power! There is an argument to be made that the work done with rakudo determined critical aspects of the character of the language as it is today. Please consider raku as the name of this programming language.

[bryndyment]

"Raku" is used heavily in Kyoto. My Japanese isn't good enough to say for sure, but I think of it as a positive word in the language. It's also the name of the city's tourist-oriented buses:

The main kanji character for "raku" is 楽, which Google translates to:

[donomii]

Definitely change the name. I have worked in many places, and it is impossible to get people to look at Perl 6. Perl 5 companies won't upgrade, because they know P6 is a different language and requires a full rewrite.

Other companies won't consider it because of the Perl name. When I try to talk about it, I dont even get the chance to say "six", because I am cut off the moment some hears "Perl".

No matter how much we like it, the word "Perl" is now tainted.

It wouldn't matter if the new name was "Chair", it would still be an easier sell.

[leonerd]

Just FYI, The Register has now caught wind of this thread and are reporting it:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/08/30/perl_language_name/

[lichtkind]

Well I think the topic needs some extra careful consideration. Spoilers, I'm for Perl Raku since its shorter, needs less changes and even expresses Larry's Japanophilia. More importantly its consistent with Raku's naming scheme (latter based) instead of number based. This way Perl 5 is free to choose its version scheme without conflict.

The Question to me is, do we want to part as a community. And for that I say wholeheartedly NO!

So why not keep the Perl name even if call Raku just Raku. Camelia or Butterfly is in my feel not an attractive name for an language. It's way too not technical. On the other hand, as a logo there are very good since they describe the naive optimism we had to have to even get here.

[scriplit]

I have the feeling that the 2 projects have to do something coordinated at this point, and that The Perl Foundation should embody "The Perl Way" (like The Apache Software foundation embodies the Apache Way). Something like that would not be confusing:

>perl -v

The Perl programming language - a project of The Perl Foundation.
This is perl 5, version 34, subversion 0 (v5.34.0) built for MSWin32-x64-multi-thread
Copyright 1987-2020, Larry Wall

>raku -v

The Raku programming language - a project of The Perl Foundation.
This is Rakudo Star version 2019.03.1 built on MoarVM version 2019.03
implementing Raku 6.d.
Copyright © 2008-2020, The Perl Foundation

[strika]

On the other hand, Google Translate claims "raku" means "sheep" in various African dialects,
"rags" in yet another, and "cancer" in Serbian.

"Raku" does not mean "cancer" in Serbian. And it doesn't have any associations to cancer. It sounds just fine. Cheers.

[chawk]

Is it possible to change the logo as well? Why not go with the Camel or something similar? I'm not trying to be negative but Perl 6's logo is probably the worst I've seen for any modern programming language. I think this matters for younger programmers.

[AlexDaniel]

@chawk we won't be changing the logo this time.

[ajs]

Note that the Japanese is a bit fuzzier than you are thinking, above. ラーク, which is closer to how Perl (パール) is transliterated, can also be read as "lark" which is a bird and a brand of cigarettes.

Disclaimer: I'm so much of a neophyte when it comes to Japanese that you shouldn't trust anything I say. I'm just pointing out some potential associations that I think will occur to Japanese speakers/readers.

[yuki-kimoto]

Camelia is good sound.

+1

[udf2457]

I'm sorry to rain on your parade @lizmat, but I find it "confusing and irritating" to live an era where businesses, charities, government and now seemingly Perl seem to think that just by rebranding something the world will suddenly be a happy place again.

Furthermore, in the context of programming languages, do we need yet another darn name ?? We've already got all the old-school (C, Pascal etc. etc.) and then on top of all that, all the beard-wearing hipster modern stuff (Python, Rust, Ruby, Go, Scala, Kotlin ... yada yada yada)

Do we really need yet another name added to the noise ?

Perl already has a strong brand and community of followers. Don't re-invent the wheel from scratch.

[kentfredric]

I would suggest Perl 5 keeps their versioning ≤ 5 until this Perl 6 rename experiment takes place, and then, only consider versioning ≥ 6 ( if considering it at all is even on the table, that is ) once this experiment is considered "a success".

At least, that way there's still a fallback option of going back to calling it "perl 6" if the name change doesn't stick.

I don't think Perl 5 advocates as a whole would have a problem with this.

In short, lets not consider any radical name changes or version scheme leaps for Perl 5 until the Perl 6 project is properly out-of-the-way of our potential trample-space.

[kentfredric]

Don't re-invent the wheel from scratch.

Perl 6 is a canonical example of reinventing a wheel from scratch. What are you suggesting?

A wheel reinvented from scratch should have a name that conveys otherwise?

[udf2457]

Don't re-invent the wheel from scratch.

Perl 6 is a canonical example of reinventing a wheel from scratch. What are you suggesting?

A wheel reinvented from scratch should have a name that conveys otherwise?

Hmm, let me see.....

How about we start with the first line of the Wikipedia entry for Perl 6 ?

Perl 6 (also known as Raku[6]) is a member of the Perl family of programming languages.

Or are we now saying Perl 6 is completely disregarding its heritage ?

I'm no Perl 6 guru, but looking at some of the code examples out there, it still "smells like" Perl, even though the technicalities might be different. You can tell you're reading Perl-ish code as opposed to some Python or whatever.

Or how about we take another example, human life.

Let's say you've got a family.

Let's say your son or daughter may turn out to be completely different from you when they grow up.

And yet no matter how different the people in the family are from each other, most families retain a common tie (their surname).

I don't see why Perl 6 should be any different.

Perl is the family. 5 and 6 may have gone their separate ways in certain respects, but I fail to see why 6 needs to disown 5 !

[lizmat]

Proposed change in Wikipedia:

Perl 6 (also known as Raku[6]) is a member of the Perl family of programming languages.

Raku is a member of the Perl family of programming languages. It was formerly known as Perl 6.

[udf2457]

I should further point out that there are many examples of programming languages that have made backwards-incompatible changes between major versions.

For example PHP5 vs PHP7

Did the PHP community go and rename PHP 7 ?

No, they did what most people in the technical world do .... documentation.

They documented the fact there would be backwards incompatible changes and got on with their lives.

Major versions are major versions, i.e. major changes and backwards incompatible changes are a fact of life. The clue's in the name.

[rehsack]

That can be a way, when Perl 6 would be a successor or Perl 5, what it seems not to be.
So we have a dual life of languages here.

[kentfredric]

Or are we now saying Perl 6 is completely disregarding its heritage ?

I'm no Perl 6 guru, but looking at some of the code examples out there, it still "smells like" Perl, even though the technicalities might be different. You can tell you're reading Perl-ish code as opposed to some Python or whatever.

Ruby looks a lot like Perl code (and even more like Perl 6 code)

Ruby is factually inspired by Perl.

Ruby is factually written from scratch.

It wisely got its own name.

And the PHP analogy is a complete red herring. PHP 7 is mostly syntactically compatible with PHP 5. The same is not true for Perl 5 -> Perl 6, and not true for Perl 5 -> Ruby.

Does Ruby abandon its Perl heritage? No. Its listed right there on wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_%28programming_language%29#Early_concept

Naming fundamentally different languages with the same name is the core "this is not clever".

[kentfredric]

Maybe I should mention that Ruby is also "-Ofun": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_%28programming_language%29#Philosophy

[slunski]

I like Perl.

Ok, how exactly changing Perl6 name would help for Perl6 ? Or Perl5 ? #Perl, or worse #likePerl ;)
can't be escaped with renaming.

Simple renaming will not convince companies decision makers. Managers are, for sure, not a stupid persons. Like in some Sherlock Holmes episode: managers in some bank can be considered sociopats - unsensitive to others humans, but not stupid. And any attemp at tricking will backfire.

There is only one way: language speed.

Or two: security. On many fronts.

History can't be changed. Perl community and Foundation decided new language is neede. And sponsored it. Some other grants was for 'Perl' too. And money goes into experiments and experience.

Legally, who is allowed to change Perl6 name ? Larry, Perl Foundation ? Core developers are well equipped to fork implementations any time. Oo, and actually Perl6 is just spec :)

And for Perl5 ? Yes, new language version had/has consequence on v5 developers. But what evicting
v6 from "Perl" actually do ? Just kill Perl future. For sure do not help with adoption. Also do not help
with new features development becouse those are keep in place by back-compatibility. Which is best thing ! Why it is not advertised ???????? Seriously, if someone want to write app and have it working in foresible future Perl5 is best teknology. Java seems future resistant but it is controlled by big companies and that make it weak eg. to rogue-improvements.

Let's be a somehow systematic for a while... Let's rename Perl6 to Perl7 and fork Perl5 to Perl6 so
some internal changes can be made... Perl5 will be good old Perl, back compatible. Perl6 will develop
more features freely and Perl7 will keep trying to catch up. If that fails Perl8 can be made with a bit shorter feature list.... That include language speed from the start... Also new Perl6, moust probably, will fail to make any difference becouse scripting languages market is busy and there is no need for something new and easy to use like in 80's. Perl5 won't be deprecated by Perl Foundation becouse it would be eqivalent of seppuku - distros and companies would immediatelly fork and freeze and then remove Perl from usage. So old Perl5 will stay as it is now and Perl8 will be new 'under construction' Perl. Nothing changes.

And new cute or proffesional name for current Perl6 will not make any difference. Just make that, sooner or later' will be kicked from Perl Foundation fundings.

Some Perl5 programmers think that this will be good for them... But it would just speed up Perl decline and will not make new Perl5 projects. Becouse of Perl5 fame. Perl6 is attemp at changing that fame, even succesfull. In spec and blogs :) Headshotting that attempt will close a circle for Perl5. Perl5 programmers will stay with unforkable, not realy threaded, not functional and easy to uglify language. But very good at smaller applications. But in last decades technology shifted a lot into giant datacenters. And into mobile devices.

IMO NOT renamed Perl6 is in same situation or better then under new name. Just make it as fast as Perl5 is. Becouse for technology adoption mainly features matters. Reasons can defeat bad fame or comedy we are keep making with rename attempts...

But looks our language scientists are already happy with finished language, whatever it name is/will be :)

[chatziko]

My background:

• I've been using Perl 5 professionally for 20+ years
• I'd have no problem using it for another 20
• I really love Perl 6 and wish I could use it more seriously
• I'm tired of the Perl 5/6 wars
• I'm more tired of the "Perl is dying" crap, which I consider a very serious threat to Perl
• I really wish both languages got the respect they deserve in the "modern" world

My opinion, for what it's worth:

• Perl 6 should be renamed, asap. Many reasons can be stated, but ending the Perl 5/6 wars alone is enough.
• Raku is an excellent choice (and not just because it's short):
  
  
  
  • Selected by Larry.
  
  
  • Familiar within the community, but completely unknown outside it.
  
  
  • Strong connection to rakudo.
  
  

IMHO this is really important, it's great to separate the implementation from the language, but right now the crucial message to communicate is that **a production-ready implementation
exists**, it is mature and has a semi-canonical nature, so that one can be confident that it won't be abandoned. "Download Rakudo" makes sense by itself, no need for "Download Rakudo Raku" or "Download Rakudo Camelia".

• "Perl 5" should be branded as just "Perl" (this happens to a large extend already).

• Perl's version should be bumped to 32, simultaneously with Perl 6's rename. This conveys some important messages:

  • That a lot has happened in the Perl world during the last 20 years.
  • That both "Perl 5" and "Perl 6" (with their negative associations) belong to the past.
  • That the future is Perl (mature but still evolving, with a new version every year) and Raku
    (a brand new language, very thoughtfully designed over a long period of time).

  It also forces people to stop using "6", ensuring that the rename will actually happen.
  
  Btw, a fallback option of going back to "Perl 6" is a bug, not a feature.




• This rename is a major opportunity that should be taken seriously, with a major engineering and marketing effort from both communities. The Perl Foundation should coordinate and sponsor this effort.

[haveabyte]

I'm an old Perl 5 guy and certainly a community outsider (both communities) so my perspective is such.

I notice a theme in a lot of the messages above of "a rename won't fix all of it's problems". Of course, it doesn't have to, a name change should be considered on its own merits.

Dealing with whether having Perl in Perl 6 is "confusing" is a complex matter. But it does seem to be baiting a bit, as I don't think anyone who knows literally anything about Perl 6 is confused about what it is and what it isn't.

1 Public perception seems to be that Perl 6 had a rough start and this is going to weigh it down for a long time, unless it's so good that it can pull itself out of that pit of bad reputation. Many people seem to perceive it as "a new version of Perl that went bonkers off the rails and was too different it took forever to be ready and nobody uses it yet and there was a lot of drama but eventually it just kind of departed from Perl 5 so it can't run those scripts and they're thinking about renaming it now because it's so new." Ok, cool.

2 Renaming it could free it from the baggage of its Perl 5 incompatibilities and deviations by declaring, loud and proud, that it's an entirely new thing. An acknowledgment of the differences between it and Perl 5, rather than allowing the negative differences to define it.

3 I don't think the name will have much effect on whether Perl 5 people try it or not. They already know its lineage and "what's in a name" after all. So a rename is really just an attempt to get attention on a "new" language and create a breakpoint between past and future - or, at the very least, a fork. That's probably how a renamed Perl 6 would be perceived - a fork that went a different direction. I've just been kind of sitting around waiting for some big announcement that it's "finally mature", but when people are still discussing what to call it... I guess it isn't. If it can't run Perl 5 code, then I'll probably give it even less attention, since the primary decision I have to make when reading about new releases of things is, "should I install this over what I have?" If not, and it never will, then it's free to be renamed.

4 Consider the naming conventions on phones. It's not just numerical. There's all kinds of Ss and Pluses and weird form factors. When you release something new, based on something old, whether you just increment a number depends on how different it is. A rename decision should be based almost entirely on how different it is from Perl 5, because anything else just corrupts it and creates questions and confusion and debate. A document/press release could be written listing the primary reasons, mostly in the forms of "differences vs. Perl 5" that justified this decision, waving goodbye and heading off down a new road but always remembering where it came from. Or, sever completely from Perl 5 and promote it as a new, totally unique language to compete against Python, PHP, and Perl 5.

5 Sorry, Raku is bad, because it creates a cognitive hiccup where people don't know how to pronounce it. Is the "a" long or short? When questions like this linger around a name, or when things try to be too clever or cute, people can be very judgmental and it can have lifelong effects. (See: GNU). I hate this. Ruby would be the best choice, if someone hadn't got there first.

7 Camelia is nice but, I agree it's long to type. Something short like Node is best.

8 C# was a naming masterstroke because it differentiated it enough from C++ while maintaining that connection to the past while being SHORTER to type.

9 Ultimately this seems like it will come down to a community conversation about how different 6 is from 5, and whether it's more of a new language than a continuation of the old and whether a clean break will help or hurt, a conversation people seem to be having here. I haven't looked into the code of 6 for quite some time, so I'll offer no opinion there. But from what I've heard through osmosis, Perl 6 is so different that, if y'all wanted to rename it, nobody would be too surprised.

10 The possible kicking from the funding sources should be a significant consideration. Ask the people paying for it what they think.

11 I think a rename would trigger a brief flurry of media coverage and increased attention, so it's important that if such a thing happens, that it happens at the right moment in the development progress. Consider this phrase on the download page: "Rakudo Star 2019.03 is a useful and usable production distribution of Perl 6" Yikes. I'm scared already. That sounds like anything but done, solid, production ready, and mature. Hopefully, if a rename happens, the media coverage and potential new users wouldn't see something like that. When you change a name, you're bringing fresh attention to the entire image, so you have to be thorough. If I walk into a party and declare that I've changed my name, I'll get one response. If I walk through the door and I'm wearing a totally unique outfit atypical to my personality and make a flashy entrance and also have a new name, people will be a lot more curious and interested as to what's going on. Make it a big splash, or, a quiet but clearly justified break from the past.

[treyharris]

@haveabyte Without taking your objections on one by one (I don’t feel like I have a “dog” in this fight, but I am persuaded by many of the arguments here), I find one point of your argument at best subjective, at worst contradictory:

The idea that “Raku” is harder to pronounce out loud correctly without having heard it before, in opposition to (of all languages you might have chosen!) _C#_—is just plain bizarre. In no other context is “#” pronounced “sharp” (except those who discuss or input music notation when limited to ASCII, surely a small segment of programmers).

And most English speakers, when presented with an unfamiliar word that can be analyzed as Latinate, pronounce it in Latinized fashion, which is perfectly fine in this case. (We clearly aren’t going for _Japanese-native_ pronunciation; the initial alveolar flap /ɾ/ _consonant_ in 楽 isn’t easily pronounceable by North American English speakers, and doesn’t occur in the speech of most other anglophones either.) And if some people say “rey-kuh”, what does it matter? (After almost 30 years, I still hear “Linux” pronounced incorrectly by techies.)

[haveabyte]

@treyharris thanks for your reply

C# was bizarre but clever and interesting. In fact, I remember when it came out I thought "C pound?" but that didn't last long and the correct answer was revealed and it was pleasant and interesting and, most importantly, had a connection to the fact that its predecessor had two ++ symbols and the # symbol looks like 4 of them. I don't think the same can be said about Raku because, even now, I still don't know how to pronounce it correctly, and it's definitely subjective that such things irritate me, and I don't know what it's supposed to mean or represent, or whether the word has some kind of historical meaning or context to it. Ok I'll look it up. Ok, it appears that Raku is an arbitrarily truncated word fragment of "Rakudo" suggested by Damian Conway, is short for "Rakuda-dō" (with a long 'o'; 駱駝道) [but what about the "a"??? sigh], Japanese for "Way of the Camel", and I remember the Camel book, so, yeah, I got it. Still hate it.

All I see (and many others, I fear) is a non-word, some kind of word fragment, that, even when its origins are seemingly revealed, isn't clever, interesting, memorable, or even pronounceable when read only in writing. Is it Rock-u or Rack-u? I still don't know, and I'm getting less and less interested by the second in the future of this programming language because of the annoying name it might have. I have a love for Perl in my heart, and would hate to see its future tanked over a lack of effort to come up with something actually good.

I guess I come from the days of when things were named or renamed, there was a clever, geeky, logical, justifiable reason for doing it, and manipulating public perception was not really a primary concern. It was more like naming a child than a product. This allowed such events to have more of a purity than they do now - apparently now it's just marketing, so it's a question best left to marketers I suppose - but it seemed simpler and dare I say better when programmers just made all the decisions. :) Except for Raku. Sorry Larry, just a vote against that. I don't have anything better. Bottom line in my opinion is, if it's different enough from 5 and it's not going to reconverge in any way (i.e., compatibility with Perl 5 won't increase over time) then go ahead and rename it. Hell, even if 100% backward compatibility was in the future todo list, you could just market it like "Raku (or whatever) is a whole new language that for a while wasn't compatible with Perl 5 but now it is but it's so different and weird and new that we decided to call it something else. Welcome!" and then get on with the task of making the language worth anyone's attention.

[lizmat]

Re pronunciation of "raku": "Perl" is pronounced "Peril" in German. Nobody is bothered by this.

[slunski]

Re current Perl5 difference from Perl5:

It's Perl. As imagined and designed from the start.

Sigils still there. Perl5 is closes language in existence and is close.

Anything not in Perl family is far far away.

Lizmat in first post didn't lay: both languages are not source compatible.

But plan from early 2000's included WISH for source compatibility with ALL
languages, especially with Perl5. I doubt it was "100% compatible" but thanx
to nine++ work we can run Perl5 code - if memory serves some Perl5 web framework
was running ! So it is a) promise realized; b) both languages are realy close;

But in reality we have two separate languages, Perl6 is not plug in replacement.

As was with Perl4 and Perl5.

So languages are so close that "different language so realy no prob with renaming" is just
uninformed opinion, as usually noted.

Misinformation not help in adoption.

Even if something - codebase or spec - will be renamed what you get is still pure Perl language.

As for "production-ready" :) :

It is, for some definition of "ready" :) Language is realy, realy nice, it's owns Rosette Code.
In our opinion :)

More ready then not ready.

• for "language scientists", blog writers - 100%
• for prototyping architecture of some enterprise app (even in front of CEOs) - 100%
• for simple scripts without time pressure - 100%

But for anything that require fast startup or disk access it's not.

Would be happy to be incorect on that !

Also I really realy would like to not have some jury intervention becouse someone hijacked
someones copyright, codebases or some other assets. On that matter community opinion is just opinion.

[duanemoody]

• short
• easily pronounceable
• link to both 'perl' and 'camelia'

I nominate 'cerl' and see no possible confusion here.

[duncand]

Despite commenting in favour of Camelia before, I very much prefer Raku as the new real name (not stage name) for Perl 6, and I recommend we go with that.

I believe there is exactly one important reason why Perl 6 should be renamed to something that is not Perl, and that is because it is a very different language than Perl 5, as much as Ruby or several other languages are. That may not have been the intent originally, but its how the language ended up. The name change is all about avoiding confusion.

Perl's reputation should not be used as a reason either for or against the renaming of Perl 6 to another word. Reputation is NOT the fundamental problem to solve here, confusion is. I expect the reputation of both Perl 5 and Perl 6 will marginally improve due to the renaming just because there isn't the confusion of different languages sharing a name. However, reputation is what is is, and that is a separate problem to solve. A rename will help with groundwork for that if it does anything at all.

We should be thinking in terms of, if the language currently known as Perl 6 was newly and rapidly created out of the ether and released in its current form today, what would be a good name for it, using the same criteria as naming any of the other dozens of new languages to come out in the last decade. We can still indicate that this "new" language is inspired by Perl 5, just as Ruby and others do, but it is still a new language that we shouldn't call Perl.

[duanemoody]

One other way in which it could be promoted is to build a web framework off it, possibly named ЯHR for Raku Hypertext processoR (note how it forms a butterfly).

[lichtkind]

I mean its only one country but in Germany camelia is propably the best know woman pads brand. But not only because I respect liz a lot I tried hard to find the positive aspects of the name. I can see that i can transport a positive vibe but it just doesn't feel the language I already program in. I think my optimum (as said) is Perl Raku. and yes use Perl 32 for 5.32 feels somewhat right but i still have to ponder that one for a round.

[joaquinferrero]

Larry wanted to call him "Pearl", but he couldn't. Now is the time:

Perla

Yes, I know that the PerLa project exists, but it is not written in the same way nor is it a general purpose language and it is an acronym.

[AlexDaniel]

At this point it's not productive to discuss other names. Useful comments that are very welcome:

• Those that point out things that need to be changed in the PR (https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/89)
• Those that provide good arguments/analysis/data as to why a rename is needed (because it's not guaranteed that all reviewers agree that a rename will resolve mentioned issues)

[mcglk]

While I empathize a little with @haveabyte's comments, I will tentatively support Raku. (I hadn't heard of the "Rakuda-dō" bit, and I think that's a clever link.)

Yes, it's an initially meaningless name, sure. So was COBOL, and any of a few dozen other languages I could rattle off in a minute or so. Yeah, it may mean a brief section in Raku books entitled "Why 'Raku'?" I don't mind. That it's Larry's preference carries a certain weight with me, but also I like that it's brief (and the same length as "Perl"), has preexisting ties with Rakudo and other linguistic links as well—and that it makes a clear break from the Perl5 line just due to psychological encumbrance issues (both in what the language should be limited by based on heritage, and on perceptions that Perl is "old" or "not used much anymore").

I'm less certain about the Perl 5.32 -> Perl 32 thing, but I think it makes some level of sense at this point, and I wouldn't argue over it myself.

(Also, @duanemoody: I love "ЯHR". :) )

[dod38fr]

To send a clear message to the world, it may be better to simultaneously rename Perl6 and move Perl5 to a next major version (Perl 7 ?).

I think this would send several messages to the outside world:

• both communities talk to each other and want to move beyond past mistakes
• Perl is alive and evolving into Perl 7
• Raku is a new language independent of Perl.

Thoughts ?

PS: I mentioned "Raku" name. But any other fitting name would be fine for this purpose

[AlexDaniel]

To send a clear message to the world, it may be better to simultaneously rename Perl6 and move Perl5 to a next major version (Perl 7 ?).

Perl5 folks will have to figure it out themselves. I don't think we can use this ticket for that discussion.

[lizmat]

To send a clear message to the world, it may be better to simultaneously rename Perl6 and move Perl5 to a next major version (Perl 7 ?).

That would be a clear message indeed. However, I'm afraid that trying to reach consensus about such a change (7 vs 32), would be even more difficult to reach consensus / a decision about. Furthermore, whether Perl 6 will change its name or not, is still not a done deal. So one can not expect p5p to contemplate changes until it is sure that the name of Perl 6 will be changed.

[kentfredric]

it may be better to simultaneously rename Perl6 and move Perl5 to a next major version (Perl 7 ?)

I really disagree. If we're going to change perl 5, we need to be sure that Raku is more beneficial than "Perl 6" before we do this, or it will create a mountain more of confusion.

[Juerd]

If we're going to change perl 5, (...)

We can't and shouldn't. The policies for changing Perl 5 are laid out at https://perldoc.perl.org/perlpolicy.html and it makes no sense for those policies to involve the perl6/problem-solving Github repository.

If this issue is meant to pave the way for a future where Raku and Perl are fully independent projects, and in which neither dictates or blocks any aspect (such as version numbering) of the other, let's refrain from trying to push any version numbering policy upon the perl5-porters. Doing that was exactly how we got in this mess. Discussion on Perl's version numbering, whether 5, 7, or 32, does not belong here.

[rai-gaurav]

I may be wrong but I will talk about what I see around my workplace and working as Perl developer for over 7+ years.
Mostly all the organization where I have worked, Perl is said to be 'legacy' (even 5.30 Duh!!!).
When I tried to do something in Perl I faced question like why Perl and not Python(90% of times) or other languages which are 'Modern' and 'great future ahead' and I don't know how to answer these questions (I was literally crying inside until they were finished).

When I started working on Perl years back, I was the junior most developer. Couple of job changes and 7 years and I am still the junior most Perl developer. I haven't encountered anyone new in Perl in my all organization. I see only Python developers(Phew!!!). Even in current organization I am the only one out of 10 developers(rest python and mostly junior to me).
Recently I suggested maybe we can start using Perl6 which was bluntly refused because of the name 'Perl'. The reason- Whether Perl6 or Perl5 the name it contains the name Perl and we should not be using that as it is legacy and bad language.Also where will we get developers for such legacy things.

I am not sure renaming Perl6 to something else will bring back the glory but leaving it to Perl6 surly don't. (Thanks to internet which is not nice to Perl. A new developer doesn't want to learn anything related to Perl because people are saying bad about it over the internet).

Another thing regarding that is - Marketing, Marketing and Marketing......
Every language now a days has backing of some big organization (I heard people saying we should use React.js because it is Facebook or Angular because of Google or Python because of Instagram/Netflix).

What I feed about Perl which most of us will agree, is it earned the bad name because of the negative publicity which is somewhat affecting Perl6 also.

What we need is a good positive publicity and a great marketing to include new developers in this ecosystem.
Again, this is something I feel while working. I hope it is limited to my region only.(better be to myself only).

P.S. 'Camelia' sounds nice

[kentfredric]

If we're going to change perl 5, (...)

We can't and shouldn't.

I was wearing my "Perl 5 guy" hat when I wrote that, and it was intended as a contradiction to earlier suggestions about warping versions to the future.

I was saying so merely because jumping that gun before the "rename to raku" experiment is considered a success will create more problems for both Perl 5 and Perl 6, which are as you said:

Doing that was exactly how we got in this mess.

I'm not weighing in as to what the versioning policy of p5p should be, merely that anything ambitious should wait till after Perl 6 gets a new name that sticks, otherwise we'll be back to trampling over each other for the claim to fame and the version.

The "TL;DR": version would be:

• a: Rename perl 6
• everyone: Yaaay
• b: why not jump/rename perl 5 as well?
• me: please calm down, one thing at a time.

[duncand]

As I don't have permission to make a Github comment on https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/89/files I will make a comment here instead.

I consider the new Raku file extensions ".rk for scripts, .rkm for modules, and .rd for documentation" decent, but I also feel that it would be better to just have the single .raku file extension instead.

There seems to be an obsession with super-short file extensions, but Raku the name is already short, and spelling it out in full with .raku I think makes it much easier to see what one has. That style already works for many things such as .java and .json. Also there is no practical reason to complicate things with multiple extensions differentiated just by main program vs other module. Almost no other language I know of does this, almost all use the same extension for main programs and libraries, and Raku should do the same. Just because Perl did it doesn't mean Raku has to.

Also, .rk is already used by the WinRK File Archives file format, which could lead to confusion, while .raku has no prior use that I could find.

In any event, the new triple is much better than the pl6/pm6/pod6 etc that we had before.

[AlexDaniel]

@duncand It's an interesting idea, but there is definitely an advantage of having a separate extension for doc files. For example, this way we can clearly define what should be rendered on github instead of showing the source, without having to rely on heuristics. As for executables, on linux I'm not even sure why they should have any extension at all because having a shebang is enough, but the situation is possibly different on Windows. As for having a separate extension for modules, yeah, I don't know what's the benefit of that.

[AlexDaniel]

Oh, and WinRK doesn't matter anymore. The last release was like more than 10 years ago? I think it's no longer available, so we shouldn't feel that the extension is “taken” by it.

[vrurg]

As for executables, on linux I'm not even sure why they should have any extension at all because having a shebang is enough,

Just how many IDEs or editors do you know which determine file type by shebang? As far as I remember intellJ doesn't allow changing file type on the fly and the only way it allows is by extension. In Atom I can't use perl5 package because it conflicts with perl6 on .t.

I also consider the idea of using .raku interesting. But do like .rk more. What really worth considering is unified extension for all Raku sources. BTW, NQP already does it. Really, what benefits do we get from separate module extension?

[tbrowder]

My brain and finger memory would have trouble if I couldn't have the extensions.

[duncand]

So a simpler question is what is the value of .rkm? I see the value with the separate docs extension, but .rkm could be just .rk instead.

[Grinnz]

Possibly the issue of a unified script/module extension would be better as a new discussion.

[AlexDaniel]

@vrurg .t is a different snowflake because somehow .t files are not even supposed to be executable and don't have a shebang.

[kuituhirvi]

I agree and propose as a solution _Perl 6_ to be named as intended: "Perl", if the officials of German town of Perl agree to its continued use.

Or to do nothing and take deep breaths, enjoy.

[kuituhirvi]

Since my last comment was marked _outdated_, for reasons that are non-obvious for me, I would like to be given a change to reason why I made such a comment in the first place. I do not think the name matters, but understand that sometimes (quite common ie. champagne) they have a purpose and a meaning. If something were to already possess a name, changing it is an arduous process and therefore requires solid reasons.

Simple cost analysis would strongly argue against such an endeavour. Birthing a language is cheap, literally anyone can afford it, nurturing it to be a good one seems to me more expensive. Therefore just creating a "raku" language would save resources compared to changing the name of Perl 6.

But the biggest object remains, a simple _namespace collision_, meaning that the rights to use chinese character of raku has already been given in the 1600. Albeit by a japanese emperor Hideyoshi to Jokei, a Kyoto based potterer, but still it was exclusively given by the powers that be. Now there might not be any rules against using that character in the name of a product but for me it is in fact already in production.

"The Japanese master had great objections against naming the work of these Americans Raku because of the lack of Zen philosophy. Raku in the original meaning was an intrinsic part of that philosophy. Then Soldner was willing to promote his work on the market as Soldner-ceramics but it was too late, his ceramics became known as American-Raku."

http://www.rolandsummer.at/aerts.E.htm

Now this is from the realm of glazing pottery, but the point remains valid, this name or character
is not yours to give. So I urge you to have decency, be considerate of others and remain disciplined in this journey. Thus far there have been, to my knowledge, zero-efforts at creating a more exhaustive search method or an algorithm.

From Wiktionary.org;
Raku

(ceramics) A style of Japanese pottery, considered the traditional style for the pottery used in the Japanese tea ceremony; (especially capitalised) such pottery made by the Raku family.
The English transliteration of a Japanese surname; specifically, that of the family traditionally licensed to manufacture the pottery.

So a minimum requirement would be a permission to use their now family name:
https://www.raku-yaki.or.jp/e/raku_family/index.html

If four ASCII-characters long string, first letter capitalised, is what you seek I am certain that all collisions could be avoided. Of course similarly perl was a word used by one french printer to call his miniature versions, but it lacks the specific capitulation and the word was not his to use (meaning it was not given by any authorities, the printer just took it and ran).

Sincerely,
Joonas.

[lizmat]

@kuituhirvi

So a minimum requirement would be a permission to use their now family name:

The same could have been said for using the word "Perl", which is mightily confusing for the inhabitants of the city of Perl in Germany. Likewise for the people of Rust in Germany for "Rust". Or for the people of Raku, Hakone, Kanagawa, Japan for "Raku".

the lack of Zen philosophy

Perl 6 (Raku) has a Zen-slice and a Mu type. That makes it way more Zen than any other programming language.

it was exclusively given by the powers that be

For pottery, for use by a potter's family. Perl 6 (Raku) is a programming language. I'm pretty sure the emperor would not have liked the family preventing the use of "Raku" for anything else than pottery. That would have gone against the emperors prerogative. So, by that logic, we should ask the Japanese emperor for the right to use the word "Raku" for a programming language. That might have been a thing in the 1600's, but I don't think that would be a thing in the 21st century.

I think the trademark aspects have been covered earlier in this discussion.

EDIT: removed the incorrect "outdated automatically" remark and unhid the comment in question.

[AlexDaniel]

This is a technical thing afaik, because we're (ab)using Github issues for this. Because changes were made to the issue after your comment, you comment was marked outdated.

No, this is not the pull request. The comment looked like trolling to me, or at least as outdated nonsense. I did hide it manually.

[AnaTofuZ]

Since there is no place name named “Raku” in Japan, it seems that the place name collision is okay.
https://chimei.jitenon.jp/data/sakuin.php?search=id&gojuon=らく

Raku in Hakone, Kanagawa, seems to be the name of a ryokan (Japanese inn )

In Japan, there is “Nadeshiko” for programming languages ​​using Japanese words.
https://nadesi.com/top/
“Nadeshiko” itself is a Japanese word who is used to honor the simple and beautiful beauty of Japanese women.
However, if a programmer uses the word "Nadeshiko", it is basically interpreted as a programming language name depending on the context.
For this reason, many Japanese programmers will not misunderstand the name "Raku". Rather, I am happy because the name of “Raku” comes from my native language Japanese.

[eapcorreo]

Hi all, I like Perl, used perl in past, not now, but I use linux, and perl is very inside it, along with LAMPP stack.
Other languages grow without name change, so, changing name to Perl looks like it is not very effective to get more people to adopt it.
But, if you want, chage it, I think result of number of users will be the same, or less perhaps.

Regards,
Eduardo from Argentina.

[kalkin]

This PR started with good intentions by @lizmat, but now it ends up as a fine example for bikeshedding. There're a few technical details which must be discussed, like file name extensions, but this can be done in other PRs. Imho everything was said and some one with higher power has to make a judgment call or flip a coin.

[niceperl]

The new name I really like: "wall"
It's a tribute to Larry (although he probably doesn't like it very much)

[sbakker]

FWIW, with Camelia as the name, you can call the CLI command camel, which provides a nice link back to its origin.

[kuituhirvi]

I would like to preface the comment with that it this is only a conversation, in my mind worth having, and someone else might find it otherwise participation is not enforced. And as to all these comments, they are written by a powerless minority, so please do not strike someone already down.

The same could have been said for using the word "Perl", which is mightily confusing for the inhabitants of the city of Perl in Germany.

Thank you for this piece of knowledge and this in my experience well reflects the SEO nightmare of having tech savvy people adopt your name. I've modified my earlier proposal accordingly, because you are correct that is not good behaviour. The scope and reach of the project was a little different when it was named.

I'm pretty sure the emperor would not have liked the family preventing the use of "Raku" for anything else than pottery. That would have gone against the emperors prerogative. So, by that logic, we should ask the Japanese emperor for the right to use the word "Raku" for a programming language.

Intuition should only be relied upon when actual knowledge is not available. Im sure Emperor Reiwa would gladly respond to request about the meanings of his ancestors actions.

That might have been a thing in the 1600's, but I don't think that would be a thing in the 21st century.

I do not find things have so much changed in the past decades. The current Emperor is from the line of succession that started when the years value was a negative one and the potterer family is the same succession line since 1600's also. Inheritance suggest their relationship remains the same.

I think the trademark aspects have been covered earlier in this discussion.

Being merely lawful is such a low standard to adhere to. I still find myself having a high level of respect towards this family of takumi artists.

EDIT: removed the incorrect "outdated automatically" remark and unhid the comment in question.

Much appreciated. I understand why it was seen provocative, but having giving it all the thought humanely possible, and even more so following the guideline: "This ticket will likely get a lot of comments, so please try to keep them small and on point.", I truly am glad that it was unhid.

_This is an emblem representing the concept of a butterfly. I add it here hopefully as a symbol of operating in good faith._
_Sincerely_,
Joonas.

[wbraswell]

@lizmat
I see your new pull request...
https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/89

Has an official decision already been made to permanently rename "Perl 6" to "Raku"???

[JJ]

Not official, and not done. The PR needs to be approved.

[andricik]

Rename? That would be Perlfect!

[AlexDaniel]

Please see the update on the PR here: https://github.com/perl6/problem-solving/pull/89#issuecomment-540117093

Basically, if everything goes smooth then it will be merged on October 14th, and you will see the rename come into effect shortly after that.

This is not just a proposal. It is actually going to happen next week unless there are objections from reviewers.

[AlexDaniel]

Also, to know what's actually going to change and how, please see the document.

[wbraswell]

@AlexDaniel
Thank you for the update.
We are all very hopeful that the rename to Raku will be successful, and that the Perl and Raku communities will coexist in friendship for the next 100+ years! :-)

[lizmat]

Since the PR got merged, going to close this issue now. Thanks everybody for their cooperation. Hugs to those who didn't see it working out their way.

[wbraswell]

@lizmat
THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!!!
You are probably the only person on Earth who could have achieved this major milestone.
Now we just need to remind ourselves that Perl and Raku should live together in peace and friendship, as both languages are still considered to be "members of the Perl family of languages".
:-)

[duanemoody]

God help us if this language ever forks again.

[vendethiel]

God help us if this language ever forks again.

There was no forking involved here.

[kawaii]

God help us if this language ever forks again.

Patiently awaiting the people who come along and fork Raku back to Perl 6. :)

[aimass]

+1 for Camelia

[AlexDaniel]

@aimass Yep. Which comment are you at right now? We recently had this merged. TL;DR it's Raku now.

[vrurg]

@AlexDaniel don't spoil! Ah, too late...

[duncand]

I suggest a relevant owner/admin also block further commenting on this issue since closing it didn't do that.

[JJ]

@duncand done. People with privs will still be able to participate, though...