Well,
I'm sort of scared of letting it out of the bag, but here is a complete answer. I'd like an OFFICIAL, community blessed library/module standard. Some of you are aware of my idea, some have even tried the ancestor of the new tool, steel's open-library function... The new tool is an object. It makes creating modules even easier and is also more mindfull to the rebol way of thinking, as it uses the rebol header as the library's header, for example. I still have no official name but librarian, liberator, modulator, moderator, vault, rock, libman top the list. basically, it supports versioning, reloading, recycling, direct from net uploads installation, even should have the setup ui built-in. Softwares will also be able to interact with the installation and setup of the library on that user's machine. The spec itself really isn't restrictive. actually the base object of any library currently has no mandatory attributes or methods. some will say that there are security issues... I AGREE, and this should be reduced once the plugin architecture is available. But then again, any module architecture, by definition, implies a security breach. Its a question of trusting the source of your tools. If you don't want to use the default librarian tool, at least you could adhere to its api and then any one who wants to share or use code, has a common method of using it, whatever the loader he uses. This helps us to progress instead of turning in circles. IF a master list of peer-reviewed libraries comes into existence (THIS is my goal), then we will be able to increase the code base as one community. Not as a group of individuals. my hope is that a central server (hey that sounds like rebol.org ;-) would have a depository of all personal/beta/rebol patch/master modules for all of us to use. instead of having several sites to follow for specific tools, we could all just dump our libraries at one place and those which are peer-reviewed, get "official" blessing by the whole community. Any bug, any tweek can be suggested on this list (or another), and debated. The author or manager of any library is then able to integrate it. If it is an "official" library then a "higher-order" workgroup of dedicated fellows are all allowed to put in the change, when they have time. I'd be the first one to volonteer as an updater, as long as a real working group is built and I'm not expected to be a community servant. The basic advantage of a master library directory is that it would enforce backwards-compatibility, and takes care about the contents, safety, performance and future. This makes all of us accept a tool as stable, and in turn, allows us the chance to assume and be relax of any of those shared tool we would use. It also makes it easier to continue development on any tool for which the author disapears or for which times keeps him from integrating all the good ideas we all have about everything. I'd even see RT collaborating, if they wish, to stress-test some ideas or view the public's reaction to future ideas without having to distribute and commit to official new beta releases... many of the new things just are new/changed rebol functions... They could also either share some information about future orientations, and bless some initiatives, if they feel they complement some of their own plans, instead of staying in the dark. I mean, if I'm going to build a stable glass release and they think its enough of an advance, for example, that VID 2.0 is less of a pressing issue, they might shift to improving view itself, supporting stuff like 2d/3d OpenGL. I know the idea of all of us agreeing to one thing is a hard to forsee project, but I really feel we are at the point where such a concensus is essential for the growth of the "platform". I am also one to think that RT cannot plug all holes. Such a community acceptance would allow them to relax on some stuff that we all want, we ARE capable of doing many things ourselves. We already have. I'm sure many of you don't agree on the usefulness of what I am proposing, but other languages have benefitted by this and I feel rebol is another which would. some the above might sound extreme, pretentious, harsh, useless, controling, whatever. It isn't meant as such, if that's how you read it... its just someone wanting to make things move in a good hearted matter... and sometimes, more opinionated language stirs more discussion... :-) 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: Andrew Martin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:07 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [REBOL] Standards > > > > Max wrote: > > IT would mean people adhering to a standard... > > What kind of standards are you thinking of? I'd like to know more. > > Andrew J Martin > Attendance Officer > Speaking in tongues and performing miracles. > Colenso High School > Arnold Street, Napier. > Tel: 64-6-8310180 ext 826 > Fax: 64-6-8336759 > http://colenso.net/scripts/Wiki.r?AJM > http://www.colenso.school.nz/ > > DISCLAIMER: Colenso High School and its Board of Trustees is > not responsible (or legally > liable) for materials distributed to or acquired from user > e-mail accounts. You can report any > misuse of an e-mail account to our ICT Manager and the > complaint will be investigated. > (Misuse can come in many forms, but can be viewed as any > material sent/received that > indicate or suggest pornography, unethical or illegal > solicitation, racism, sexism, inappropriate > language and/or other issues described in our Acceptable Use Policy.) > > All outgoing messages are certified virus-free by McAfee > GroupShield Exchange 5.10.285.0 > Phone: +64 6 843 5095 or Fax: +64 6 833 6759 or E-mail: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject. > > -- To unsubscribe from this list, just send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe as the subject.
