Don't bother pretending it'll ever be a viable project - periodically he sends patches trying to force perl5 modules to change their code because his type checking code doesn't work, then follows it up with a volley of insults when the maintainers go "huh?"
Typechecking errors? There are occasional errors because of adding more strictness and warnings from perl6 (strict names, hashpairs, ...) and some internal test and bignum modules are typed for 2x faster performance and to catch typical errors at compile-time. There's an API, and the types reflect that. The problem is that the implementations and the users don't care about the API at all, and neither about typechecks catching these errors.
There are no volleys of insults to any maintainers at all. You still don't get the difference between necessary technical and professional criticism and personal attacks. In fact p5p is throwing around personal attacks and insults all the time. E.g. you are one of the main examples of immature racism in your very public YAPC talks, accusing all Germans to be Assholes (in allcaps) for years. Thought about that once? Why do you think you were not accepted as pumpkin and again the technical most incapable person was elected?
p5p had their chance to do anything with the language in the last 15 years, they had a proper design and spec and sister languages doing the same. They did nothing, all attempts failed and they blocked all improvements from outside. There's no proper management, no process. Either you are committer, then you can do what you want, or not, then you may not do anything. Well, in fact there are only 4-6 bad apples at the top. The rest is doing good, but silent. But the TPM board is protecting the bad apples, promoting the most incompetent, they are even collecting the worst of them. Only if you managed to completely fail a huge project you are the perfect member for the board. Only the most unsuccessful culture warriors are lining up there.
perl5 is not recommended to be used in anything serious anymore. There are dozens of serious bugs and design errors not fixed, and errors and destruction being added every new release. I have no time to file all the CVE's, look at the cdelta's. 90% of the decisions are wrong. The new code of conduct is being misused to silence valid technical criticism, because perl5 is now a religion, and you may not distrust the leaders. This was literally the explanation.
I did, indeed, have a couple of slides in my talks where I said "if you think somebody's an asshole, you could be wrong, maybe they're actually just german" - referencing the direct german style of communication, which I personally rather like.
Taking this exactly backwards and then calling it "immature racism" is ... precisely the sort of thing I was referring to, as is deriding everybody you've had technical disagreements with as "unsuccessful culture warriors".
I find this a shame, but we've discussed it more than once over the years and given I haven't convinced you yet, I find it unlikely I ever will.
It's not that I cannot be offended by stupid stereotyping and attacks on Germans (Erik Naggum had some really vile posts in that regard), but the above is not even on my top ten list of things bothering me today.
Number one is cooking quinces to death, because I just wanted to blanch them a bit and forgot to turn the stove lower), so still pretty inconsequential.
Every other german who rendered a comment on said talk thought it was hilarious and clearly got that I sympathised due to being pretty blunt myself (oh gods east coast american middle managers, how easy they are to offend ...)
My commiserations on the unplanned demise of your quinces.
I've heard points similar rurban makes from mlehmann, who also got tired of p5p and maintains his own perl5 fork.
I'm not a german btw. but my mother was born there, so I felt with them.
If anybody's confused why there's a downwards arrow on one of the slides it was so I could stand underneath it to proclaim myself loud, blunt and obnoxious at the start of the 'assholes' section because this was a community hacking talk and I was identifying myself as part of the group I was about to talk about.
I don't even have access to any of the relevant bits of youtube.
This is just getting silly now :(
"Some people who initially appear to be in group X may turn out to actually be in group Y" does not, at all, require that all of group Y may appear to be in group X. Logic doesn't work that way :)