> Your nascent developer community needs to have
> something runnable and testable to play with.
Alain: The rush to code is part of the problem, in my
view.
> It's fairly clear that one cannot code from
> the ground up in bazaar style. One can test,
> debug and improve in bazaar style ...
Alain: Humm .. I have often proceeded in this
haphazard kind of way, on projects where I do
everything myself, with no outside help. But I am
increasingly confronted with the reverse situation
these days. All projects of any scale requires a team
of talented individuals that must have a
design/model/plan to refer to, to make sure that no
one's efforts get trampled, and so on.
> ...but it would be very hard to originate
> a project in bazaar mode. Linus didn't try it.
> I didn't either.
Alain: Given that we are a collaboration (team), I
would like to give the textbook approach to systems
design a chance. At least a little bit of the Top-Down
approach in order to make sure that we are heading in
the right direction ( e.g. heads-up, hindsight, ... ).
> Might it be one matter to code from the ground up
> and another to launch and operate an organization?
> IMHO that mention is about the act of code writing
> -- and that act is NOT the same as the
> organizational model.
Alain: Indeed! The task-centered programming is quite
distinct from the more general organizational issues,
which is why the latter tends to make the former a
little bit impatient, since the former is more
evidently related to the goals of the group of
creating its HC clone, and thus tend to ignore or
neglect the latter, figuring that these issues will
resolve themselves in time, only to have these issues
surprise them later ...
> I do think that it is hard to start from scratch in
> the coding efforts ...
Alain: Paradoxically, programmers tend to view
planning and documentation as necessary evils, best
left to others, while the "real" action is in the
coding. Overcoming difficult programming conundrums
with astute coding tricks is .. well .. fun!
Alain: So I conclude that it is NOT hard to code from
scratch. Quite the contrary. You don't have to plan
anything. You don't have any constraints imposed on
your coding style and habits. You can pull off some
idiosyncratic tricks that no one else will be able to
decipher later, perhaps not even yourself, because you
don't have to interpret someone else's or your own
code when you are starting from scratch. The only
hitch is that no one but yourself (for a few months)
will understand your code. Consequences: You start
over each time without benefiting from the potential
re-usability of your previous work. And you can also
forget about enlisting people's help. They won't be
able to decipher any of it, and it is not likely that
it will be adaptable to the group's needs, in
particular those needs that the lone-programmer did
not (correctly) anticipate.
> if Eric says it is so.
Alain: Eric has given us a big hand with legal stuff,
and he is currently working on the graphical aspects
of the FreeCard GUI, but what does all of this have to
do with programming-from-scratch?
> But, to our advantage, we've got MetaCard to
> lean upon, for starters. That benefit is HUGE.
> Thanks Scott.
Alain: Scott's contribution is indeed appreciated but,
one must also admit, it is not used much yet. It is
more of a model than it is a basis upon which we can
build. All of the source code of the GUI will be our
own. Work on the FreeCard interpreter is on-going.
> Plus, we've got some open-source stuff out there
> too. Perhaps we should have someone do some open-
> source asset resource investigation and reporting.
Alain: I have suggested in the past that we adapt some
Perl stuff. Not the Perl scripting stuff but the
underlying C-code. We could thus avoid re-inventing a
whole bunch of stuff that is already coded. MacPerl's
access to the Mac's Toolbox and its full support of
Apple's Open Scripting Architecture, for example, come
to mind.
> In our quest for progress one of the big reasons of
> forming an organization is to have an official-like
> group.
Alain: The main reason that we are forming an
organization is so that we can collaborate together,
in such a manner that everyone who participates will
enjoy the experience and will reap the rewards of the
group's collective output.
> I think we (the original organization) need to exist
> in ways beyond an email discussion group. We need
> more than a uniform FTP site.
Alain: A Web-based collaboration infrastructure would
be nice. Perhaps annual meetings, in person, at a
location decided upon by ourselves each year.
> IMHO, we need some type of ORIGINAL ORGANIZATION
> that exists.
Alain: You are perhaps correct, but it makes me wonder
why a formal piece of paper registered with the
authorities is so important for the viability of our
group.
> With this group in a viable mode of being, it can
> both ask for gifts and accept those gifts. People
> won't "give" nor "contribute" to an email discussion
> group. There has to be someone home to catch the
> gifts, so to speak, me thinks.
Alain: We can ask for and accept gifts without being a
formal organization. Case in point: the HyperCard list
did a donation drive for placing an ad to save-HC. And
now they have a CD thing going too.
> A "jump-start" on development can come by making the
> rounds and being a bit of a "lint-collector" trying
> to pick-up significant contributions.
Alain: Absolutely.
> I think we'd have some success with begging.
> But, we've got to beg in an "official capacity"
> representing something.
Alain: We are .. FreeCard!
> If the early begging works, then, the creative
> energy from the masses that we are able to assemble
> (optimistic projection) would be able to tweak and
> moderize the contributions -- as well as (begin to)
> glue them together.
Alain: It sounds like you are hoping for programmers
rather than the masses, which is precisely the kind of
folk that we want to attract at this time. The masses
will come later, mainly in the form of consumers that
are not as endeared with programming as we are.
Alain: The question thus becomes: How do we attract
more programmers? Will a formal organization sway them
into joining? Perhaps. But the contrary can happen
too. Case in point: Scott. And myself too. In fact,
anyone that's in business will be wary of joining as a
partner for fear of liability and other legal
entanglements. Besides, as evidenced by the history of
computing to date, programmers tend to be a somewhat
visionary non-conformist lot that want to change the
World and, hence, will be attracted to our group
because of its ideals.
> Sure, the original work needs to proceed, but many
> efforts can be happening in the same periods.
Alain: Right on!
> Rather, let's pull it off, but let's try to throw
> out enough raw meat to the wolves as soon as we can
> -- and then we won't be staying where we started.
> We won't be starting from scratch as soon as we
> provide new arrivals with something to scratch.
Alain: Are you suggesting that we rush to code and/or
rush into a formal partnership, so that we can
demonstrate to the outside world, and to ourselves,
that we are really doing something?
> Anyway, I think we can go without being a
partnership.
Alain: I agree that this is a viable possibility.
> Sorta used to agree. Now, I'm seeing some big
> upsides to progress if we have an organization that
> has some real people at its helm.
Alain: Are you suggesting that it is sufficient to
have our organization officially consecrated with
readily identifiable figureheads to insure our
success? Or are you suggesting that we also delegate
decision-making powers to these leaders?
> Some classes at universities insist on the
> students doing a class project. If we could
> gather our partners with enough of a presence
> -- we might be able to better pitch our
> projects to willing student programmers so as to be
> included in some academic homework assignments.
Alain: Good idea. I have recently participated in such
an arrangement. In the best cases, it is beneficial
for the employer/teacher and for the student. In some
cases, it amount to the exploitation of students ...
Case in point: it has been my case several times in my
life!!
> Sure, its speculation.
Alain: Speculation is not bad.
> there could be serious breakthroughs -- but I
> don't see that type of "evangalizing" happening
> on a day-to-day and month-to-month basis ...
Alain: We are, so to speak, currently evangelizing the
political, community and socio-economic potential of
the open source movement. We can and we will
evangelize other aspects, if and when they come to
pass. One should be careful about being too boastful,
too quickly, or suffer the loss-of-credibility and
derision that will be levelled at you by incredulous
outsiders.
> ... without being "knighted" as a "partner."
Alain: I am seriously considering NOT becoming a
partner of FreeCard, especially if there are or will
be un-anticipated risks that could jeopardize my enterprise.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
