World: r3wp

Innovative stuff. Not something we can do with Syllable's C/C++ code 
base :-(

sounds like campfire

Nah, that's chat, isn't it?

yes ..

I'd prefer "broadside" :)

in going with the rebol theme

kaj: it's a toy because you can do whatever you want with it, but 
not put it in production, because you'll get no support at this point. 
well, of course, if you want to go into production with no support 
and knowing that the next release may break everything... of course 
you're free to do that, but don't complain to us then :)

Ingo: it should be said, that in R3 you can also code (in C) the 
networking etc. as all that is in the open source part. ie. you can 
add ssl:// yourself.

I've had Syllable in production for five years. I don't mind

I also want to add that we the community need to be careful not to 
push into the release or feature discussions, only Carl and the core 
developer group can know what fits the product development timeline. 
 This is hard as we all have our specific needs but at best those 
are the kinds of distractions the team doesn't need.

umm... the target is the community

if the developers don't develop for the community, whom are they 
developing for?

I'm talking about priorities, why should we tell them what goes together 
in what order.  I expect them to deliver it all at some point *smile*

because the community knows best :)

a development tool is useless without developers

it would help if the developers all wanted the same things in the 
same time frame ... but they don't ;)

It's like that millionaire quiz program on tv .. the audience usually 
gets it right

I can tell them what is important to me, but I can't tell them slice 
core off first and then work on view - only they know enough to make 
those calls.

Ashley - sure we do - we want it all now.. *smile*

not always, but usually

Now imagine that most developers use core and web servers, they will 
want http(s) before they want VID

but who's to know?  Unless they ask.

Our input is important but as a developer I know the best path to 
get to the finish of my project, not the users waiting for it.

which is why developers need managers - to correct them of such ideas 
<BG>

As both developer and manager I can say I have problems with myself 
sometimes...

the developer may know technically what is best ... but they need 
to communicate the reasons

Now Gabriele says he wants to concentrate on VID ( which was only 
going to take a few days ) because it was hard and pop was easy.

That doesn't seem a technical reason to me.

BTW, I have no interest in testing R3 .. no time. I'm playing the 
devil's advocate here.

I do not have enough information to make an informed decision on 
something like that, part of why we need more visibility but also 
why we need to pull back from "telling" RT what should be done.

we haven't even started telling RT yet

Does anyone know of any open source project that has suffered from 
too many developers???

It sure sounds like it to me?  The frustrations put here are of the 
do this do that nature which I don't find as productive as they could 
be.

I would say most of them myself but that is just personal opinion. 
*smile*

interesting .. most of the projects I see, there are so few contributors

Ah, sorry didn't follow.  The ones that had too many suffered but 
yes many don't have nearly enough.

we did have the previous vid debacle where it seemed egos got in 
the way, and we had a proliferation of resizing schemes

VID is much more visible than pop. For some people, the fact that 
REBOL has a simple declarative GUI is the *only* reason they noticed 
and subsequently use REBOL. I think the focus on VID is the right 
call.

excepting VID is still incomplete after how many years??

which is why we have RebGUI :)

Anyway, I guess this is all religious talk

Well, it's actually perfect for trying to bag up as priorities and 
get them sent to Pekr and user.r.  Don't worry about having a voice, 
we are attempting to start a funnel channel.  As Graham says, the 
majority usually rides the top of the bell curve, and if that information 
can be summarized, it can't hurt.  No actual guarantee of it helping 
but it can't hurt and it's bound to influence to some degree or other.

Graham, if the audience usually gets it right, why isn't the audience 
making R3? :-)

Graham, even if most developers wanted HTTP first, keep in mind that 
RT has specific goals to reach, because it's a company with investors 
and eventually products or services to sell.

rgaither - stop taking excuses! :-) If RT can't manage it themselves, 
someone needs to tell them, what to do ...

as for R3, the release seems to be managed, but honestly, I would 
not allow Gabriele to define, what is important ;-)

and I wouldn't let Pekr define what's important either :-)

just a joke. :-)

that is allright with me, if you ask :-)

I don't take it personally. I am just used to what I do with my daily 
job - define strategy, and path to lead the team to final result. 
I can quickly adapt to other solution, if it makes sense ...

If you would ask RT to have guy(s) to define their marketing aproach, 
they should use Robert + me (eventually :-), but developers would 
not have a say here ...