I think the way IBM has embraced the open source philosophy has been quite astonishing, but gratifying. I hope they'll do very well with it.
I'm not too concerned about the future of Perl after me, because I see how these people are interacting with each other and even when I'm not there, they are helping each other and solving each other's problems in a way that I could not do, even if I were there.
Natural languages generally are not designed by humans, they're just designed by the participants and you say something new and somebody else says, "Oh, that's a cool way to say it," and the next thing you know, everyone is saying it because it's shiny.
Although the Perl Slogan is There's More Than One Way to Do It, I hesitate to make 10 ways to do something.
The way I see it, if you declare something portable, you'll always be wrong, and if you declare it non-portable, you'll always be right.
Perl is designed to give you several ways to do anything, so consider picking the most readable one.
The problem with being consistent is that there are lots of ways to be consistent, and they're all inconsistent with each other.
The random quantum fluctuations of my brain are historical accidents that happen to have decided that the concepts of dynamic scoping and lexical scoping are orthogonal and should remain that way.