Carl, I for one see problems with core code becoming open-source. Bloat and extras, have a terrible effect especially on a language like RE= BOL, I would not like it to folloow Python.
On the other hand LUA has managed to keep its core "pure" and small and e= ffectively the source available to anyone - its problem seems to be that = it has become a language imbedded in a lot of software but not cohereing = into an environment. I am obviously very new and ignornant, but one way I see REBOL standing o= ut is as an application environment, indeed a see it as having a possible= future as THE application environment in a lot of areas. Diverse hosting is a problem, small OSes need to easily have REBOL ported= to them without central responsiblity for doing it. Another way of seeing things develop, business and technology wise is to = find a good niche for REBOL's Wildman project - that is a fixed architect= ure machine/console with a large enough market to supply the capital to p= ort hosted REBOL consistantly over all OSes, more or less, without except= ion. Obviously I am thinking of the PS3 and PSP market and ancillaries to this= as a begining point, but a modest number of PDAs and powerful multipurpo= se Phones and other fixed-architecture HW would form a strong starting ba= se. The problem then is to have at least common productivity software genres,= and familar functions and extensions, to make REBOL Wildman worth buying= . The thrid option, is to make REBOL core source available, on an as is bas= is - a licensing agreement (how the hell it would be enforced I don't kno= w) where the source can only be used for porting and only "adpated" for t= hat purpose. But once released there is no getting things back, multiple slightly inco= mpatible REBOLs, or REBOL itself bloating because of innovations elsewher= e with the source code would in my opinion be no good. I prefer the Wildman approach, one because it is sorely needed. A miniscu= le OS and a script based application environment resting on generalised c= ompiled "plugins" is my idea of the future for computing - I believe we h= ave reached the end of a blind alley with OS development in its current f= orm - the Wildman approach seems to cut through bloat elegantly.=20 Bloat and application quarantine (each app being a world unto itself) see= ms to me the major issues before the industry. REBOL's business future, a= nd langauge future seems bound into one. Greg Schofield Perth Australia --- Message Received --- From: Carl Read <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 15 Sep 2007 11:53:06 +1200 Subject: [REBOL] Re: Rebol SDK vs Command On Friday, 14-September-2007 at 12:01:28 Gregg Irwin wrote, >I'm not sure what products are what anymore, Which succinctly sums up RT's problems as a 'business'. It doesn't open-= source, so REBOL can't become a popular language, and it doesn't do the b= usiness basics to make it succeed as closed-source software. -- Carl Read. --=20 To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to=20 lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject. -- To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
