oops.. I meant 2010, not 2006.

I still haven't figured it out yet, so let me take this chance.
Can someone help me clarify: am I right about this?

- Perl 6 is the successor to Perl 5, it will not exist as an implementation but as a specification. That specification is finished and definitive. It is owned by Larry Wall and small circle of his friends. They want everyone to implement interpreters for Perl 6;
- An official test suite for Perl 6 exists and it is complete. Anything passing this test suite IS Perl 6. The test suite is stored with Pugs, an "early" attempt at a Perl 6-implementation that is no longer developed;
- Perl 6 will not be interpreted directly by any one interpreter, like earlier versions of Perl, but it will be interpreted by a VM (Parrot) that 'plays' bytecode fed to it by several language-specific bytecode-compilers that act as plug-ins to Parrot. Parrot is owned by a bunch of friends of Larry Wall;
- Several groups of people started implementing Perl 6. Pugs was one of the earliest. It is now unfinished and dead. Rakudo is the implementation-in-progress that gets the most attention now, because it is closest to being finished. It will be released for production in April 2006, which will mean "Perl 6.0 is out and it works". As with Pugs and any other bytecode-compiler for Perl 6 though, you will need Parrot to run it. Rakudo, Pugs et cetera are owned by their respective developers.

Forgive me the long description of what I now think is Perl 6, but the various websites I try to find answers on aren't making it a lot more transparent.

Could someone comment on this if I misunderstood something?

And what about these views. Are people right who say:
- Perl 6 is not finished by any means, but the people working on it don't seem to care as much, and instead go on to question the validity of the concept "finished".
- Meanwhile, Perl 5, the ruling king of scripting languages has become fringe, and Perl 6 is largely viewed as a toy for philosophically-minded scholars.
?

.. I'm I the only one who gets mildly suspicious when reading 100-core instead of 128-core?

I've noticed a long time ago that I change my phone to my other ear depending on whether I talk business or emotions.

No it is not. It is a report from a formal and powerful committee from within the parliament (Commissie Brinkman.) The minister did make an informal comment - thankfully - against this proposal shortly after receiving the report, but we have yet to await his final decisions -- and that of his civil servants et al. This could well be a matter of months.