-- pekr --

I wont't quote you, I agree with all.

Many people also have different views on how everything should work and do similar 
tools (RSP and my own remark.r are a good example), that is ok, but then it seems, not 
many actually wish to use those tools once we share them.   That is deeply incrusted 
within rebol,  you like it because you can do anything the way you like it, but then 
you feel lost, because not many released, rugged, tested, proven, tools exist (in the 
public eye) on top of which you can do it.

THAT is the specific goal I want to achieve with steel.  provide a common gateway for 
all tools to integrate, as though they were all wrought of the same iron.  There are 
many facets in order to acheive this, but hey I can't wait for no one to do it, 
especially not RT.  So I do it, stay focused on the end goal, even if its sometimes 
quite (read extremely) boring to code.


comments on rebol/view:
-------
glass was built from the ground up using view.  no vid code used anywhere.  I had to 
learn view itself, and although I am now happy I had, cause I've created really 
advanced faces, it really was a pain to find all the information (some things still 
are mysterious).


team management.
------

If I can make a parallel with steel and RT, I think we suffer from the same problem.  
a fairly detailed release plan with a good idea of what it -should- be.  the plans are 
large and include many things others are doing or trying to, but which aren't 
integrated.  So if you have limited resources, to the exterior, it looks as if its 
really all ground to a halt, but its not the case.   most suggestions are already in 
the detailed specs, most can't even fathom the advanced plans I have for steel, glass 
and liquid, but there is so much to do before, that sometimes I feel like I'll never 
get to them.  I'm sure RT suffers from the same problem.

the main difference between me and RT is that I try not be silent (I hope I'm not too 
loud though).  I'm giving as much of what I'm doing so that people can see where its 
at.  I also WANT people to participate... which seems to be contrary to RT's POV.

BUT alas, it seems people only want to share efforts if their name is going to be 
included into RT's credits.  Only wishing to work on projects with RT's stamp on it.  
it tooks years for rebol.org to get to what it is now, in the sence that I had also 
started to put effort in trying to get it go back live three years ago... but that 
never delivered, cause I was completely alone and stopped getting feedback from those 
who had the site's control.

The PROBLEM I HAVE with the community is that many of us sit and wait and hope that 
either RT or some guru will create the tools they need.  

I agree that many tools are missing, but we should not wait, we should cooperate, in 
the end, even RT might use some or our code if its rock-solid.

STEEL has always been open source minded, but no one seems to want to DO anything.  I 
mean beyond saying "sounds cool", "I' might", "I think", "I hope".  Only one person 
offered to do real concrete help with steel.  and I lost his name in a computer swap 
which went bad, so I don't know who it is anymore (others than it was a french person, 
please come forwards again :)

There are MANY extremely usefull tools.

The real problem is that none share the same api, look and feel, or share some common 
philosophy.

Most distribute their scripts in different forms, many aren't specifically released as 
code bases which are easy to reuse, or even meant to be linked to.   Many scripts 
expect people to peruse the code and figure out how it works, or how to make it work 
within your code.

Python and perl are success stories, because they did not depend on one holy person to 
do solve all miracles.  They quicly setup a standard way to exchange and link code.  
They made it so that whoever wants to solve a specific person, can only create a 
linkable module which solves that specific issue and it gets ALL dumped into one 
archive, no matter where it came from.  That way the author of the language can say, 
hey, they fixed that, I can work on something else.

rebol.org is probably the one thing that might revive the community spirit, if it 
lives on.  Many people only acknowledge efforts if they are supported for a long 
time...  It is a way of knowing if the effort is genuine or if its just an impulse.  
no one wants to use a tool that will stop being supported a few weeks after its 
inception.  Working as a team helps a lot, especially to keep motivation.

I have something in the oven which will help the community to become more united, but 
I am scared that it too will be just another "looks nice", "sounds cool" thing, even 
if it will be only be distributed in a release-level and supported state.  IT would 
mean people adhering to a standard...

oooh i said the evil word... standard.   Most of us love rebol cause its not standards 
based (in terms of coding methods), you don't have to adapt your mind to a fixed way 
of thinking... but if the platform is to become more accessible and stable, this will 
have to become a serious consideration to those of us who build tools.


surprise:
----------
I am working on a tool to help us get united in the way we release tools.  I have been 
hacking away for a few weeks now, on and off.  I'll be open to suggestions on how to 
improve it and will add any code that someone contributes to it, if it makes the 
system safer, more rugged or easier to use, once the version for peer review is 
released.

I don't want to say more, specifically to reduce the amount of hype and limit 
expectation in time and features, but I am working solely on this architecture 
everytime I sit in front of my rebol editor... (which is not nearly as often as I'd 
like too)... its not the most fun thing to code, but It should help the community 
unite in a way that it currently is not, as long as the community itself accept the 
api and takes the time to adhere to it, and improve it.

Robert, Gregg, the project's  current version is not based on creative metaphors, 
altough ROCK was the prefered term when I started it, cause it represents a solid and 
durable material, something akin to a foundation on which you build your stuff. I have 
since renamed it to something more conservative, specifically due to your observations 
about liquid's naming making it less obvious to approach.  :-P  



cheers!

-MAx
---
"You can either be part of the problem or part of the solution, but in the end, being 
part of the problem is much more fun."
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Petr Krenzelok [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 8:18 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [REBOL] Re: Hitting the learning curve
> 
> 
> 

-- 
To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.

Reply via email to