Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

[REBOL] ENOUGH already Re:

From: joel:neely:fedex at: 25-Sep-2000 7:52

Hi, Grant! [grantwparks--yahoo--com] wrote:
> ... I'm not saying limit it strictly to coding > questions and examples, because I think discussions on > collaborative efforts to build a few killer apps is > fruitful, but maybe there should be another list for > all the discussions about what RT 'should' do. >
Am I the only one who caught the irony here? A post that asserts that there's too much discussion "about what RT 'should' do" contains the suggestion that "there should be another list"! As RT is hosting the mailing list, this suggestion provides another thing RT "should" do! ;-)
> I am simply happy to have such a language which is so > new and different and powerful. >
I am happy to have REBOL, as well. However, the traffic on this list has always included suggestions for what RT could/should do to make the language more powerful, or at least more responsive to people's specific needs. Some of these issues (e.g., compiling to byte-code or other non-source form) have to do BOTH with the technical capabilities of the language, AND with RT policy and long-term plans. Members of this list should be able to express themselves on such issues, as they ultimately affect us all. Some of the members of this list have expended much- greater-than-average effort toward REBOL advocacy, a subject that ultimately affects all of us -- wider usage of REBOL translates into less risk of losing a language of which we are all fond. But taking an advocacy position causes one to have a greater need to understand the answer to "Whither REBOL?" Some of the components of this question (e.g., long-term pricing and product stragegies, including definitions of future products) are more about the position RT wishes to occupy in the computing industry than about technical details, but there is still SOME overlap. Members of this list (especially the ones who are taking publicly visible positions of REBOL advocacy or who are trying to drive behind-the-scenes decisions that affect REBOL adpotion) should be able to ask that question, and be able to express opinions regarding the relative merits of various possible answers, as this question affects us all. My experience has been that reading (or participating in) the discussions of all of the above usually forces me to clarify my own thoughts and introduces me to ideas of others that I would never have had on my own. YMMV.
> I mean no offense, but how many of us who are so smart > about what RT needs to do to be successful could have > done what they've done? >
I mean no offense either, but REBOL has reached a point in its life where the visible part of "what they've done" thus far probably has less to do with the long-term viability of REBOL as a professional programming language than what they're going to do next -- and that's not just technical in nature. RT has been very patient with a wide range of suggestions and discussions (technical or otherwise) on this list. The "old hands" on this list have been very patient with suggestions, discussions, and questions (mostly technical and elementary) from the new/newer/newest members (which includes me). I suggest that we all have patience with discussions which may not interest all of us equally, but which are usually important to the participants. In the extreme case, I find the Subject: header a valuable clue as to whether I want to invest time in reading a post. OBTW, I also agree that, beyond a certain point, beating a dead horse is not only unproductive, but downright disgusting!!! (Unless, of course, you're tenderizing horse steaks! ;-) -jn-