[REBOL] Re: Beta Expiration
From: chris:starforge:demon at: 23-Jan-2001 10:15
David Hawley wrote:
> What is the point of having expiration built into the code? I can see
To date the only RT technologies you can distribute are the /core
binary and /command runtimes? /view is a beta product which is not
ready for commercial deployment. License restrictions are fine if
your users stick to licenses, but few businesses have remained in
business by trusting their users on such things. Building in an
expiration prevents all but the hardcore hackers from deploying
a product comercially. As with a lot of software development
companies, RT needs to maintain an image. If you read the blurb on
the RT site you'll realise it's not aimed at developers, or even
end users for that matter. It's aimed at managers, pen-pushers and
admin people who pay more attention to how many buzzwords there are
in a sentance than the specifications of the product. This image
is not served by allowing people to ship products which rely on
a stable but incomplete product like /view. What happens if
someone develops a product which seems to work fine but, when
shipped, encounters problems with /view? How is that going to
affect the customer? At best it'll make them less open to Rebol,
at worst it could generate a lot of negative publicity that
puts off potential customers and discourages investors.
There are sound business reasons for expiration dates in beta
software. IMO the big "problem" is that RT are so careful in
releasing fairly well programmed betas that people forget that
they are testing incomplete, possibly buggy code rather than the
finished product.
Chris
--
New sig in the works
Explorer2260 Designer and Coder
http://www.starforge.co.uk
