On 24/11/2007, at 22.18, Carl Read wrote: > > Well it's not PR I was wanting, but more realistic timeframes like > you (and Giuseppe) are providing here. But they should really be > on rebol.com somewhere, so can be considered official.
The only problem with it, is that the schedules are rather shaky, for example with Gabriele's and Cyphre's temporary departure of still unknown duration. We weren't aware of those from the beginning. Making such things public might make it even more difficult to keep an image of a company that delivers. Not that there already is a good record for that, but talking publicly about schedules and not keeping them, just throws away the last bits of credibility that RT has left. It would probably be simpler to make a time table, if we all worked at RT in-house on a payroll. > The problem for those already using REBOL (but outside of the inner > circle) is we get comments on the mailing list here along the lines > of "R2 is obsolete", yet we don't know how long it'll be before its > replacement appears in a form that's good enough to actually be > used as a replacement. Of course we continue using R2, but it's > hard to imagine starting something with it that's supposed to have > a long shelf-life. Well, my personal opinion is that R2 is not going away any time soon. I have products under development for R2 and don't expect to start working on R3 products until some time after beta release. DevBase runs only under R2 currently. But when R3 goes beta for true public scrutiny, it will really obsolete R2 in so many ways, that you only want to use R2 for those very large, complicated scripts that depend very much on VID or View. > Many thanks for this response. Glad to be of help. :-) -- Regards, Henrik Mikael Kristensen -- To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
