I've been avoiding getting into this discussion, largely because I fail to understand just why it seems to be an issue at all, much less a big deal. But once again, against my better judgement I allow my big mouth to open.
> On my part I guess I'm assuming complexity will come, whether we like > it or not. I don't find it easy to believe that we can avoid > complexity forever, Well, considering Plan 9 has been around for well over 20 years (longer btw than UNIX had been around when the guys at the Labs decided to start from scratch), it has appeared to me over that time that the Plan 9 community has done a good job of choosing what complexity should be there and what shouldn't. Given the history, I'd need something pretty compelling to justify expending effort on that assumption. > and I get the feeling some relatively rapid growth > is coming. What kind of growth do you have in mind? That's important because it affects what, if anything, should be done to accomodate that growth. It seems to me we might have 0, 1, 2, or 3 of these types of growth: 1) growth of the complexity and source code of inidividual apps, a la, the implementions of cat and cp recently discussed 2) growth in the number of end-user applications along the lines of: > Could Plan 9 grows to the point of having many GUI > applications and many facilities to support those apps 3) growth in the number of end users in the community None of which I think are too likely: 1) The GNU, we never met a command line option or abstration we didn't like, approach is anathema to the aesthetic of the Plan 9 community. I find it extremely difficult to imagine the poeple in this community sitting idly by while the system is made ugly in the same way others have been. 2) I don't really know what kind of GUI apps and facilities are needed. A web browser that has sold its soul at the crossroads so that it it might include javascript, java, css, flash, xml, the kitchen sink, and whatever other abominations you can imagine, that such a web browser might find use. But other than that I can't really think of anything that I use often enough to miss in Plan 9. But certainly if you need something enough that you're motivated to write it, then by all means do so. If others find it useful, they'll use it, but either way you've still met your own need. This is where your observation fits in: > A script or two to help find what was > installed might be just the thing, If, in the course of using the system, you feel the need for this kind of script, then write it and see what happens. But the approach that says, "I'll write this because I know everyone will need it and we'll make sure it becomes policy" will fall flatter than Wile E Coyote after the anvil misses the Roadrunner and lands on him. 3) The Plan 9 community is very happy to welcome those who share its aesthetic and who make productive contributions. It's also quite welcoming of those who seek to learn from the experience and expertice of the community. But those who come upon the community with the agendas: "why don't you have my favorite xyz app; you need to write it," "here's what you're doing wrong," and "your OS has no value unless it has millions of users"... well, the two things that come to mind are perpetual September and an old phrase about grandmothers and sucking eggs. The bottom line is for anyone who has a good idea, just implement it and we'll have something to discuss. The amount of time and effort that too often goes into these discussions is far greater than what it would take to just write the app and see whether it was useful. Returning to the underside of my rock... BLS
