Good patches (tight code, complete, correct) stand more chance of going
in. Sloppy or incorrect patches might be placed on the back burner
-until the pumpking has time to fix, or might be discarded altogether
+until fixes can be made, or they might be discarded altogether
without further notice.
=head3 Is the implementation generic enough to be portable?
=head3 Does it create too much work?
-Work for the pumpking, work for Perl programmers, work for module
+Work for the committers, work for Perl programmers, work for module
authors, ... Perl is supposed to be easy.
=head3 Patches speak louder than words
Gisle Aas's "illustrated perlguts", also known as I<illguts>, has very
helpful pictures:
-L<https://search.cpan.org/dist/illguts/>
+L<https://metacpan.org/release/RURBAN/illguts-0.49>
=item * L<perlxstut> and L<perlxs>
=item * F<Porting/pumpkin.pod>
This is a collection of words of wisdom for a Perl porter; some of it
-is only useful to the pumpkin holder, but most of it applies to anyone
+is only useful to the pumpkin holders, but most of it applies to anyone
wanting to go about Perl development.
=back