Peter Seibel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Feb 22, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Paolo Amoroso wrote: > >> I realize that my frankness may sound harsh. I am aware that >> volunteer labor is a gift, and that Real Life takes its toll. But I >> would like to understand why the CLD has received so little help, and >> whether this may have any implications for current and future >> gardeners projects. > >> Ideas and discussions are no longer enough. Lisp needs labor, not >> praise. > > [...] > > So if you're just here to lurk, lurk on. But if you want to help and > you haven't yet, please either find a project to pitch in on or post > something to the list about what you'd *like* to work on and we'll > see if we can help you out.
I am not a gardener; I have not subscribed to this mailing list; I like to think that I put in enough labour without being on this particular mailing list, but since this post was drawn to my attention, let me answer this call to work and its apparent impetus. I think the effort put into the Common Lisp Directory was almost completely misplaced. It places content moderated by some unknown bunch of people into some strange limbo, where it's not clear what attempts to be authoritative and what isn't. It has no community behind it (yes, of course this is a chicken and egg problem). It has no focus beyond "Common Lisp". To the extent that it intersects with my interests, it provides negative added value over CLiki, because at least on CLiki I can correct mistakes and add content with minimal effort. Fortunately, Google doesn't like the CLD very much. I wanted to demonstrate some of these points using an example, and ironically it took me several minutes to find. I guessed three times before finding where Papers lived in the pseudohierarchy, and then remembered that although what I was looking for demonstrated an example of method combination, it wasn't a paper, but some example code with comments, and was therefore a library. I found it eventually; its title is "Defaulting optional arguments for generic functions" but it leads to code which at first sight has nothing to do with this. Yes, the "official web site" link explains the connection, but it is opaque to the visitor to the directory. Search is bizarre at least; for instance, the egotist's search for "christophe rhodes" doesn't find the person of the same name. There are many other user interface weirdnesses; why is search only available from the index page; why do I need to click? But essentially my feelings about the Common Lisp Directory is that it provides no benefit and sucks up effort from those who could better spend their time elsewhere. Having said all of this, I don't want to make the CLD administrators angry, hate me or leave the Lisp community as a bunch of whiny losers who don't know what's good for them. I would name them, but actually I can't because I don't know who they are (and I couldn't get the CLD to tell me), but at least Marc, Paolo and Arthur have individually and collectively in the past done good things, such as speaking at meetings, maintaining the encyCMUCLopedia, and flying the CLIM flag for Europe, among many other things, not to mention the software that they have released for people to use. I simply do not think that the CLD itself is an interesting or sustainable way to manage information. Away from the CLD, and again since I've been pointed at this thread, here are some more thoughts. "Lisp needs labour, not praise", yes, but I don't think that work for work's sake is of any use to anyone. Lisp will grow sustainably if people use it, learn to use it better, write stuff in it and about it, release cool applications or useful libraries, and so on. I think Paolo realises this, but I don't doubt his labour, and I address as he addresses those who haven't yet lifted a finger: if there is something that interests you, excites you, or even is a work project, then if you can, don't just keep silent, trying to solve every problem yourself: make the problems you run up against known. If you've evaluated XML libraries recently and found them all wanting for your purposes, say so. If you've tried to write bindings to Apple's MIDI interface and failed because of Apple's woeful documentation, then shout: someone else may have hacked something up, even if it's not release-quality. This is the kind of information that should be exchanged, not things which can be found more easily using Google that in some specialized directory; there would be added value from a directory if there were room for opinion (such as "this project contains no useful code") but it seems that this kind of editorialization is out of scope. The information that helps newcomers sort through the maze of stuff that's out there; in many ways, I think Paolo's ~/.signature file was a far more effective CL Directory than the current effort, and that is the kind of communication I would like to see encouraged. I would of course also like to encourage newcomers into the world of Lisp, developing stuff, using libraries, writing useful bug reports. Not at any price, though. If you newcomers do make yourselves known in response to Peter's call, then there will be interest in assisting you; silence will not lead to your problems (if any, but then if you're on this list you at least perceive problems) being solved. Cheers, Christophe _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
