[REBOL] Re: Idea for [rebol.org]...
From: robert:muench:robertmuench at: 20-Mar-2004 13:10
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:18:35 -0700, Gregg Irwin
<[greggirwin--mindspring--com]> wrote:
> My experience is that REBOLers play *very* well together. I've worked
> on a number of projects with people from this list and other channels.
>
> What I see as different about REBOL is that all the things we do
> remain external from the main distro (as I think it should be right
> now). Even if we come up with a great library, it won't ship with
> REBOL, so people still have to look for it. This is a big difference
> compared to other systems.
Hi, yes that's right and brings it to the point. But we are all a bit too
RT focused...
> To support the reusable/shared code approach in a general way, I think
> we need to have some other pieces in place (e.g. how to organize and
> define "projects", include other files, etc.). This is where RT comes
> into play.
;-)
> There are various INCLUDE mechanisms out there, but RT has
> their own (PREBOL); which one to support?
The one, that's available and works best. If there is an official one, we
can use it and migrate things. Yes, not the best way but at least we get
something done. Oh, and I think if we use a own made one, we can have some
influence on the official version. I'm sure Carl is open to look at our
stuff and happy if he doesn't has to think our all things himself.
> Package support is a great example. Should it be RIP, ZIP, RPM, doc'd,
> with metadata, allow 'includes, etc. We talked about a lot of things,
> and would still be talking if Sunanda hadn't taken the initiative to
> get *something* out there for comment and use.
Correct, he took what was there, and integrated it to get something up and
running. Best shown practice here!
> A library approach like Boost might help, and I think that's something
> REBOL.org can support, though maybe in a less formal manner.
I agree it shouldn't be to formal. I think we should have a vision and
some people taking care, that everything fits together. How a piece of
code is done isn't that interesting... if it's good it will be used, if
not, than not. As said, I see the formal need in the process, so we all
know what we get and what not.
> People can collaborate via REBOl.org. Scripts can be shared by
> multiple owners, though I don't know how many people are using that
> feature.
I expect, very few. Because this is only a tool question in the second
step. The big step is taken to get a team formed. I'm in good contact with
a couple of people here. And works great (IMO) but it takes time to get
people interested and tell them what you want to do.
--
Robert M. M=FCnch
Management & IT Freelancer
Mobile: +49 (177) 245 2802
http://www.robertmuench.de
