World: r3wp

is it possible to have scripts editable by anyone?

without owners, or with more than one?

I am starting to wonder if there is now more collaboration in the 
community, such that we could start compending libs of utility funcs, 
instead of separating them in tens or hundreds of separate files.

using official REBOL style guide and wrapping every lib within a 
CTX object and possibly an extra function which exposes the words, 
instead of forcing them directly using 'set.

maybe officializing a naming convention so they have a distinct name, 
making them easy to identify by peers.

maxim, a script wiki?

something like  lib-org-whatever.r   ?

yeah sort of

rebol.org has everything needed to manage it, including documentation, 
forums, users, excellent indexing on google (thanks to carefull work 
by sunanda).

and its pretty bot defensive  :-)  meaning there is little chance 
our work will be defaced.

http-tools is a good example.  I have some stuff, you have some stuff, 
there is A LOT of it here and there.

it would become public domain, meaning you relinquish rights to what 
you submit, unless someone wants to organize a rebol source foundation, 
and then we can have the foundation be the authorised copyright owner 
of the peer-reviewed libs.

I have advocated for this years ago... before rebol.org became organized 
by sunanda and team

but its hard to have rebolers working together... something about 
all of us being free thinkers...

well, there are some things that I've found to be astonishingly effective 
and that is asking questions in here. there is almost always an answer 
so you can get your code working.

but this is a closed world, it gets lost,  some ppl leave,  and it 
prevents the platform to grow.  seems like we are always rebooting 
the community every few years...

well, I guess that's how things are right now. I do find it to be 
a bit elitist, you have to ask permission to come in here and most 
of the people know each other somewhat.

the IRC channels I visit can be a bit the same. It's like being a 
stranger walking into a bar full of people who know each other very 
well. either you are accepted or not.


The elitist thing is not meant at anyone here, but I think it can 
be seen as elitist from the outside. :-)

There have been a number of initiatives in this area, but none have 
taken hold. I think it's *very* important, and have wanted it for 
a long time, but the hard part is coming up with a design that will 
work for everyone, since there is no standard for modules and libraries. 
I'm hoping R3's module design will address this, and give us the 
common ground we need to do something like this.

Part of the "problem" is that REBOL is really built for programming-in-the-small 
today, and being interpreted, you can't optimize out things you don't 
need--not without a preprocessor of some kind. It also lends itself 
to simple, direct word use, not the more verbose context/func approach. 
That makes it harder to build effective libraries. 


I've often thought that the best approach might be a simple library 
of "global" functions, which would basically add to the available 
words in REBOL, so they should be very generic, and there might be 
a lot of them. More complex modules would be contexts, and we'd need 
an agreed upon system for naming, exported words, etc.

Collecting things is a good first step, but then we quickly need 
to consider something like Ladislav's #include function  and a context/module 
standard.

I've been dumping functions on Big Bold's snippet repository; it's 
easy and provides visibility to non-REBOLers, but you can't search 
for stuff by tags and there is no collaboration system of course.

Hi All,  I have often discussed the stuff... I have done more than 
just propose, I have coded an open framework to handle libraries.

it has been used, I use it daily.  I have been using it for several 
years now.  and it does many things more than include.

I'm not saying its perfect.  never have, but it was supposed to be 
a starting point where people could agree on a platform for sharing 
code.

it already handles all of what Carl proposes wrt modules.  except 
what can't be done like namespacing, and memory protection, which 
have to be hard-coded in the interpretor.

its on rebol.org its called slim.r

but the basic issue with the REBOL community in general is its lack 
of unity....  Most of us are free thinkers.  We do our own, cause 
we can !  :-)

its funny that Gregg brings this up (again) cause I was chatting 
to sunanda about setting up  a special part of rebol.org.

which has no "scripts"  but actually  "libraries"

either tool sets or individual utility functions.

the basic premise is that any tool should be able to have several 
competing implementations and versions.  They are available, made 
free of license restraints.

I would call this the Rebol Vault.  or in short   REVAULT which ties 
is very nicely with the REBOL itselft.

All this would need is a few conspirators who manage the code submission 
in order to classify them and make sure they comply to a clear manifesto.,

there is no refusal of code, only that it must obey to common sense 
rules.

then we would have a useable set of professional interworking toolsl 
which will grow instead of runing in circles.

rebol.org has many nice features.  but I feel (and sorry for being 
open and blunt) that its a tough resource to use.

many things either do not work or have no useable examples in how 
to use them.

any how... I am saturating this group... so I'll stop, but I'd like 
some support from others in trying to ORGanize the Content of rebol.ORG.

the site is well organized... but its content isn't

and it reflects the community.

wrt slim, people might say its not documented... well, it was all 
documented on the web for a long time... but that didn't change anything. 
 And I can't be the only one providing all the answers for such a 
community oriented project.  Other people have to jump in.  The list 
of advanced features within slim is too long to list here, but it 
has many things even python coders wish they had.

so  I ask this, is anyone willing to put a little bit of time where 
their mouth is... and help me organize the content of rebol.org.

I am not talking about adopting slim as it is.  it maybe too full-featured. 
 but we need a common reference.  and people underestimate how Carl 
perceives the work done by the community.  If the community tends 
to its own. and creates a precedent... I know Carl will be only too 
happy to work in the same direction.

I am sure that the good hearted folks on rebol.org will only be happy 
to get help and in the least some heart felt orientation on how it 
can be improved.

so, my ranting is done, it is not aimed at anyone its just that I 
wish rebol.org was more usefull for me... I imagine I'm not alone. 
 :-)

I am willing to put a bit of time on structuring a vault of high-quality 
and re-useability functions and toolsets.  Is anyone ready to help 
me put some time on it  ? (speccing, coding, refactoring current 
sources,  and/or management of submission of new code).

Maxim


I also personally feel that Rebol really needs an easy-to-use, well-organised 
standard library. (Ruby Gems seems to be a very good model). 


I will be willing to help once I have done a few of the things that 
I have promised to do

.. on Rebol.org

ok I will make a discussion for this:  revault   (just a working 
name)