Lets not forget that for certain types of applications, rebol is far more productive and flexible than many other languages. Its simply efficient and very well thought out. I think many developers just like using it, and like myself dont mind contributing to the cause because rebol and its community has enabled us to do wonderful things. I personally look forward to the chance to contribute to R3 in the future, my way of giving back, and adding some great features that I think everyone will benefit from.
Godspeed RT! ---Ryan Practical Productivity 707-245-8226 Alessandro Manotti wrote: > Hello Gabriele, I agree with you: this topic is taking the light on a lot of > things. > > I think this topic is taking on surface some other things related to Rebol > that let me a little bit baffled: > > 1) it seems (but it is not clear) that there are only a few people that work > on Rebol (you, Carl, and another couple of guys). > 2) All Rebol developers do not work at full time to Rebol development. > 3) It seems there are more information about the development plans of RT > here in this topic than in any other place: it means, maybe, the > communication between RT and other people (Rebol fans!) is not well > performed. > 4) It seems that there is not any official development plan. I think this > could be a good method (well... not good... but acceptable) for Open Source > / free apps (developed by the volunteers in their free-time), but this is > not acceptable in a professional development. Yes, in fact, sometimes, we > discuss here as if we are talking about free apps, but we should not forget > we are talking about commercial application. Imagine that, several years > ago, I bought a Command license for my company (they do not allowed me to > buy further licenses since the development was stalled... that was the > impression). Then I bought a personal license (View/Pro) for me. > > Again:we should not forget that from RT I do expect a commercial quality > program, commercial quality upgrades, assistance, etc... > > Look at other programs like Real Basic, Runtime Revolution, 3D Game Studio > (I use it for 3D, and it has an affordable price for an Indie developer, > Beyond Virtual, etc....), etc... (I do stop here, but I could proceed with > many other programs...). All these development tools, have regular upgrades, > new milestone releases, etc... That's all. > I want to highlight that I like Rebol, but I'm afraid that RT seems to > manage it as a product created by some volunteers, not by a commercial > company. > During these days I was even thinking to offer me to help in Rebol > development. But the problem is this: > > 1) Since Rebol is not free (and RT gains money from it), I cannot offer me > as free-of-charge. > 2) If I could work for free, mybe in the future, if Rebol developement will > be stopped, I will remain with *NOTHING* in my hands, since it is not free. > If I partecipate for free to develop a GPL (LGPL or similar) product, if the > main development group will stop development, I could get the source code of > the product self. In Rebol... no. > Look at similar cases: Commodore Amiga (you know very well), OS/2, BeOS (do > you know? It was really incredible and a revolutions OS, but it failed), > several Smalltalk versions (Dolphin Smalltalk, IBM SmallTalk). More: > Microsoft J++, Borland Kylix (sigh... I like Delphi!), etc.... > > Don't forget: I talk in this way because I like Rebol, else I was not here > to spend my time to talk about it! :-) > > Ciao Gabriele! > > > > On Nov 25, 2007 5:14 PM, Gabriele Santilli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >> 2007/11/24, Giuseppe Chillemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> >>> The new VID is on only on Carl's mind >>> >> That's not really correct. I think it's 90% done (though we're going >> to re-evaluate the design soon, and I may need to rewrite some parts), >> even though the remaining 10% is the one that takes the longest (the >> details)... so it would probably need 3-4 weeks of work (which can >> mean two months real time because I may also be doing other things in >> the meantime, like protocols, testing, R/S on R3, and so on). (Keep in >> mind that 90% required less than 3 weeks, done over about a month - we >> started working on VID in mid July and I had to go back to Qtask in >> mid August.) >> >> >>> In this situation Rebol3/Core will need at least 3 months to leave the >>> pre-alpha stage and go alpha. >>> >> That may be true as there are many things that still need to be done >> (tasks etc), however most of these features are not that critical, so >> you can call it alpha even if tasks are not 100% done and so on. I >> think it already qualifies as "alpha" since you can already write >> useful apps with it (and I did). >> >> >>> Then will come the time for the other >>> protocols to be implemented and debugged. This mean another 5-7 months. >>> >> It can be done in parallel. Carl works on the "kernel" (the actual >> interpreter, the datatypes, etc.), I work on VID and protocols (with >> many others contributing mezz code, eg. thru DevBase), Richard works >> on View and so on. >> >> >>> Thinking in parallel, VID will be structured and engineered during this >>> time. A first implementation of the new VID will start after core with >>> protocols will go beta. >>> >> That's not correct - we're at the second implementation already and >> don't think the third will take much (I think the current code is >> flexible enough for the changes Carl wants to make, so there's not >> much to rewrite. It was asked that we have "css like skinning", and >> although I don't think we need all the complexity of "css like", we >> can do something like that by just using the way VID3 handles style >> options - you can write button "Click" options [rounding: 6] for >> example, so we can just make the options names more "css like" and >> there's not much more code to write). >> >> >>> Should we think that 1 month is enough for a full GUI system ? No, it >>> >> will >> >> No, about 2 are needed, but it might have been less if I was not >> interrupted. Then of course we still have to refine the edges after >> that, and maybe it will take 6 months or so to call it "release >> candidate", but it's not that hard. It's REBOL we're talking about, >> not Java. :) >> >> >>> 2010-2011 Seems the time-frame for the firsts maturity and usabilty of >>> Rebol3 in big projects. >>> >> It may be true that it will take a few years for it to be as mature as >> R2 is; but, keep in mind R2 was done in like 6 months, and about one >> year later we got View (2000). In 2001 I was already writing >> commercial applications with it - some are still in use today even >> though they run in View 1.2.10 or so. Even though RT may be much >> smaller now, I think you are a bit too pessimistic. OTOH, since many >> things will be left to the community, it's hard to predict when we'll >> have a "critical mass" of modules and plugins available. >> >> Anyway, that was a good post, and I completely agree with the idea - >> there's no need to wait for R3, and even if it's going to take some 3 >> years more, the world won't fall in the meantime. >> >> Regards, >> Gabriele. >> -- >> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to >> 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.
