World: r3wp

As for Boron, I'm all for it, as long as it is license comopatible. 
The ORCA license precluded any sharing with REBOL (the license choice 
seemed to do that deliberately), so any work on it was necessarily 
divisive. Which is why it hasn't really gone anywhere. If Boron chooses 
a open source license that is compatible with R3's open source license, 
then there will be no reason to choose one instead of the other - 
you can choose both, and have work on one benefit both.

This is why Mono and .NET work so well together: Their open source 
portions can be used by each other. This is why more and more of 
Microsoft's development tools are being released with open source 
licenses.

That's easy then. Carl hasn' t come up with a license yet, so he 
would have to use the Boron license

This is the first time I hear there was a development reset. Why 
was that?

Design process broke down, and needed a reboot. We know how to build 
a language, but we weren't as good at building a working community 
development model that was compatible with the language design standards. 
All better now :)

Kaj - I am really not sure we have to hear such a crap ... anyone 
carrying a brain in his head CAN properly follow what R3 development 
is all about, how MUCH energy is being put into that. Anything else 
is a junk ...

I can't believe I can read reactions dismissing the effort. And I 
really stop to care ...

That open source idiocism really plays on my nerves. So ppl have 
Orca for 4 years? Isn't it open source version of REBOL? Yet we can 
hear, that if R3 is not fully open sourced, it will not be accepted. 
Accepted by whom? A GPL freaks? Should we care? I have really no 
respect to such ppl. Where is Orca nowadays? That open-source-being-a-cure-for-all-problems 
is really turning into being rudiculous

Henrik is totally right. Even if R3 would be 100% open-sourced, the 
same ppl would still find some excuses to complain about. Screw them 
:-)

Geomol - please stop complaining about R3 alpha or R3 GUI world. 
You were one of the invited top developers, yet you was one of those 
failing to provide a feedback. I remember how you all preferred to 
chat about science here, instead of providing any reasonable input. 
So what actually are you complaining about?

... because - I was there, daily. And if I wanted, I could talk to 
Carl, on almost a daily basis, privately. Anyone could ...

You, too, are seeing things into this that aren' t there

yes, of course, I live my life  on a magic mushrooms :-)

If you say so

my god... people... calm down...   :-D

R2 still exists and works...

Yup, that' s why I use it. And anything else that works

and Boron is just another language.  in any case, we can learn cool 
things from it and add them to R3.

I speak both french and english... and well, neither is evil   ;-)

Unless you use your hand while playing soccer

let there be 10 REBOL alternatives...   :-)   that will just attract 
more people to the style.. and ultimately to REBOL.

Anyway this should be moved to advocacy

I just had a remark about chrome OS.... its really nothing very new... 
its a 50 year old concept.

the fact that it uses http, html and js... doesn't make it different 
from any other stupid dumb terminal.

advocacy ..

this is not advocacy... I'm not talking about REBOL.... :-P

Pekr, please. Log into R3-Alpha and look in the old talks (also before 
you were invited there). You'll find many posts from me. I often 
choose not to talk, when the noise level go up. When you entered 
R3-Alpha, the noise level raised a great deal, so you will find fewer 
post from me at the time forward.

Talk talk talk isn't solving many things. Saying the right things 
in little words can be a benefit sometimes.

Yes, and there was the second world - R3 GUI, and Carl invited me, 
because top 10 developers did not provide much of responses. That 
world was imo very well focused, only handset of ppl there. That 
contradicts your claims ...

As I said - I don't care anymore.

You can apply "talk talk talk" to yourself as well :-) I can bet 
that you don't have the right thing to say. Or you might try to define 
actions RT or the community should take, to bring any REBOL advancement 
on-board.

All I see here is failure to realize what R3 is about and why it's 
dangerous to clone or fork it. If it were simply a programming language 
then it wouldn't be much of a big deal, because other languages are 
in a similar state of confusing disarray. Programmers are used to 
having to select an implementation of a language. It would be bad, 
but it wouldn't be terrible. REBOL has the luxury of not being in 
this state. Since R3 is an OS-like platform, much more is at stake, 
because people may decide not to be interested in R3's biggest features 
at all.


Extensions and host code opens up a big employment gap that is potentially 
never filled, if people decide impatiently to just clone REBOL, if 
they are unhappy with a particular aspect of R3, because they didn't 
either study it hard enough, don't realize how hard Carl is working 
on servicing exactly those people or just can't wait 2 months for 
that feature to be implemented or this and that bug to be fixed.


Having 10 REBOL alternatives diminishes the much needed authority 
of the original REBOL and it diminishes the authority Carl has over 
the language. REBOL can't grow without that authority. That's also 
why things like Linux isn't doing any better than it is, because 
of massive re-inventing of the same crap over and over again slightly 
differently, because people in that environment haven't had an ultimate 
design authority to work against. We have that here and we must not 
lose it. That is what allows REBOL to grow way beyond other platforms.


But I realize also that such growth is not in many people's interest 
or within their grasp. They just want a turd polished in a different 
color rather than wait for the flower to grow.


This is one case where evolution is not needed. Intelligent design 
is needed.

Talk in R3-Alpha started 3-Oct-2008. The reason R3-Alpha didn't get 
much attention? I guess, the same reason many didn't went to R3 chat.

Henrik - I don't even have problem with existence of a clone (if 
such clone would be clone of the interpretter and used Host code, 
so that we could have swap-in solution). I don't have problem with 
things being open-source at all. But - what I am looking for is - 
project management. It is not enough to just state - let's support 
Boron, cause it takes too long for RT to finish the project.


Things should be balanced. Hence I ask only for one things - someone 
stating A (e.g. Boron), should be able to also state B (many questions, 
as - 1) why do we expect the project will draw any attention, even 
even Orca did not succeed here? 2) where are our resources available? 
Who is willing and has enough of time to contribute, so that we don't 
wait another 3 years for such a solution? 3) Will it be 100% compatible 
to official future product - R3? If not, isn't it a risk? We already 
face R3 vs R2 incompatibility. Do we need another layer?)

I could understand it some 2-3 years earlier. But now so close to 
beta, with host code soon to be released to first group of testers 
(Max, Cyphre, Brian, according to docs), I don't really don't understand 
what some ppl are questioning here. Last year has seen reboot in 
the R3 development attitude. Gee, 80+ tickets fixed monthly, Carl 
and Brian taking care for each ticket, anyone can influence the development 
and design, etc.

Geomol :-) There were two worlds - R3-alpha - crowdy, lots of talks, 
there was really much of noise (not just by me), as it was the period, 
where Carl e.g. disappeared for some period of time. But then there 
was another world - VID3.4 related, called R3-GUI, there's just 9 
ppl ...

(not just by me = not only by me)

I named the group wrong. I should have written:


Talk in R3-GUI started 3-Oct-2008. The reason R3-GUI didn't get much 
attention? I guess, the same reason many didn't went to R3 chat.

group = world

So, sadly, Romano was right... it's all turning to a second Amiga...

what's turning to Amiga?

(I guess rebol .. so in what way or why??)

Is it that bad? ;-)
Let's learn from all this.

Only bad if it follows through to the same conclusion...

I newer saw an Amiga in my life an don't know anything about them 
... so what's the story there? They were better than anything but 
somehow failed to the inferior PC-s or something else?

Janko - as for Amiga, there is so many aspects to its decline, that 
I don't know what had Gabriele in mind.

First thing is, that Commodore went under. Carl, in one interview 
at the time when he joined Viscorp in order to ressurect it, said 
that innovation has stopped. So the first aspect was, that what caused 
Amiga to be succesfull, started to stagnate. The product was mostly 
repackaged upon the time, but not much technologically advanced. 
Here I can't see any parallel to Amiga, as R3 is development without 
compromise. We are even sacrifying compatibility, and trying to get 
the design right this time ...

Janko, in short, Commodore went bankrupt because of bad management, 
and Amiga was left with an uncertain future. The community got divided 
and people started to use bad language with each other. Like you 
see with very religious people, that defend their religion with all 
means against people thinking otherwise.

Then Amiga went thru Escom to Gateway to Amino, to Amiga Inc. (2 
incarnation of Amiga Inc.'s actually - Delaware and Washington). 
Then there was also a community split - some guys started to create 
MorphOS, a competing product.


But maybe what had Gabriele in mind is, that Amiga is almost dead 
due-to incompetence of parent company. The company does not communicate, 
it made some wrong decision (Amiga Anywhere product vs most ppl wanting 
official AmigaOS to evolve). AmigaOS was made second level product, 
and its development was subcontracted to Haage&Partner (OS 3.5, OS 
3.9). Then there was conflict between the companies and H&P refused 
to give away sources. So Hyperion stepped in, and was subcontracted 
to do OS4. The same situation - last month court granted Hyperion 
right to use AmigaOS trademark, and Amiga Inc. can't use it.

But - in Amiga case, you CAN'T see any single activity, any vision, 
any leadership. Amiga means many things to many ppl. In such a situation, 
it would be probably better, if some time back in 2K, the AOS sources 
were open-sources. It would probably stop clonning efforts (MorphOS, 
AROS, Anubis), and community would not fight for which one is better, 
there would be no split ...