World: r3wp

I'm thinking about using Google Groups...I'll do a review of possible 
options in the next days to decide.

I remember you used altme before and of course all that discussion 
is now gone ...

spam can be a problem on google groups .. not sure if that is still 
the case

I'm surprised you don't mention Cheyenne in your credits :)

There is mentioned built-in webserver.

Good catch! I did the introductory slide for the Cheyenne presentation 
first, so it wasn't necessary. Then I forgot to add it when I copy/past-ed 
the slide in Red presentation. :-)

The built-in webserver will be simplified, lightweight version of 
Cheyenne written in Red.

red_lang now has 6 followers and no tweets!

what will happen to poor r3 now? :-)

Twitter: I'll send a welcome message :-)

Pekr, R3 has been in development for .. is it 5 years now?

Evolution will decide the place for each language

I wonder as well if this means that Carl will stop completely or 
want to finish R3 asap.

Graham - it was sad irony on my part :-) I remember how I translated 
Carl's interview somewhere in 1996, when he left Viscorp, and was 
asked by Gateway, to join in and to lead Amiga. He has choosed REBOL 
instead, stating, that he wants to avoid Amiga mistakes of the past. 
Now he is effectively killing REBOL by no-action just the same way 
....

competition is good ... leads to better products

Carl has written a number of languages now .. .commercial ones, doc 
.. I don't know

Oldes - I fear that Carl closes the shop, instead of open-sourcing. 
Or - he might continue in R3 development, doing 2 releases per year, 
being still in alpha after another 5 years, and gaining some momentum 
on some vapor lists, where e.g. Amiga is being recently listed :-)

Red's MIT/BSD licensed (which? both?) so there 's no reason we can't 
work on both R3 and Red.

I don't think my announcement will change anything for R3 development. 
In fact, it might even attract more people to R3, while waiting for 
a working Red version. ;-)

The last time i looked at Paul Graham's arc, that seemed to be stalled 
as well.  the point is that this is a huge undertaking for any single 
person

Brian: I haven't choosed yet.

Thanks for the PDF doc. I had trouble with RocketSlide as well.

They can be complementary. Red is really limited (according to the 
slides), so mixed language projects could be appropriate as long 
as Red's syntax is a strict subset.

So, developers will have to choose where they want to go ... and 
there's a limited pool of rebol developers

It would even be possible to extend R3 with a Red dialect.

Graham - developers can't affect R3 Core development, not in public 
enough manner. So Red might be a testbed for R3 too ... and who knows, 
maybe Carl will be motivated to restart R3 development :-)

I hope so ...

For me, R2 is the only REBOLed product. R3 is still alpha version 
since years.
For the transition to Red, R2 is good.

the last time there was a language fork .. RT made some announcements 
to try and make rebol more attractive

BrianH: sure, why not.

yes, it was when Doc was working on R# - Carl then announced plug-ins, 
which never materialised for R2 though :-)

Doc - have you looked into Orca/Boron, if there is something usefull 
for Red? Or are those interepreter based too?

I almost never use R2, except for R2/Forward. Most of my work is 
in R3, and depends on it. For me, R3 works already, and "alpha" is 
irrelevant.

Orca/Boron aren't license compatible with Red, same as with R3.

The main block on sharing work with Orca/Boron and REBOL is their 
license.

Except that Rebol is sold. I can't imagine that Carl is not going 
to sell R3 !?

BrianH - from end user's perspective, you might not be right - missing 
pop, smtp, ftp, sqlite, mysql, postgress in official distro, just 
to name the few, GUI's not useable yet too, hence ppl keep tied to 
R2 ....

That's why I'm tied to R2 Petr, and CALL is important to me as well.

Pekr: Interpreted as well and written in C, so no possible code re-use 
for Red. But I must admit that if I hadn't choosed the compilation 
path, I would have jumped into Boron to contribute. There's some 
good potential there for a serious R2 open source clone.

someone should get the info to Carl, maybe he will stop breeding 
chicken and start coding R3 again :-) (just a joke - I have nothing 
about breeding animals :-)

Agreed, Pekr, but my situation is different. I don't use most of 
that stuff, and when I do I have R2, or many other languages. Most 
of my apps have no UI.

Gregg - right, I forgot that one - 'call, and very bad console, which 
did not serve initial purpose - being usable via ssh etc connection 
anyway ...

Red's forward-thinking view on parallelism is very welcome too.

R3 also does not have a 64 bit path mapped for it

Gregg - well, we have odbc for R3, as well as libCurl for networking 
(or Graham's networking protocols), call is here, it just does not 
wait nor does it read the output ....

Yes, Graham, also important.

Today, the best way is to open sourced R2 and merge with Boron effort.
As R3 is different from R2.

We're a bit OT here, don't want to hijack the group.

well, the group purpose is completed!

Can't merge with Boron while it has a *GPL license.