[REBOL] radical pov ... Re: Re: rebol/base
From: petr::krenzelok::trz::cz at: 30-Sep-2002 19:01
Anton wrote:
>Everyone thinks their particular scheme is the
>simplest. Rebol Technologies are the ones
>actually doing the work.
>I also think choosing appropriate names is one
>of the most important things. A strong vision
>for something comes when it is named well, and
>in advance.
>
Yes, it is - but enough is enough imo. Just ask someone from external
world, what do they know about Rebol? If they even recognise it, they
are already confused by all the following:
Rebol/Core
Rebol/View
Rebol/View/Pro
Rebol/Command
Rebol/Command/View
Rebol/Link
Rebol/Serve
Rebol/IOS
Rebol/Encap
not to mention Rebol/World, Rebol/Media, Rebol/Author, Rebol/Apache,
etc., which appeared here or there even in some of announcements,
articles, etc.
Now just add new name for stripped down light/base versions of all above
and watch the show. ;-)
How much /Core and /Base differ anyway? 20KB of size ... memory usage?
Missing functionality? Well - is it enough to take care? My suggestion
is - change Rebol architecture for good, do it clever way, allow options
and reduce product line - remove /Pro and /Command versions - add real
components. If you want version without access to system resources, call
it Rebol/Player, make installation process very easy, add auto-update
feature and you've got nice (browser) plug-in. But any other
diversification does not make sense ...
Sorry for bringing in different pov, maybe a radical one, but that's
just me (and those agreeing with me, staying silent ;-)
-pekr-
