[REBOL] Re: Rebols United (was) Re: How to get Rebol forward
From: tbrownell::L3TECHNOLOGY::COM at: 29-Apr-2003 11:14
I tend to disagree and don't see the ML as a good place to develop projects.
Rebol is a tool ONLY. It's not an idea, other than Carl's of course, and
regarding the improvement the tool itself. It's the idea that's has value.
The tool has value, $99 USD for pro etc., because it was first Carl's
Prior to IOS and AltMe, I came up with the basic (but functional) IRSee. It
was more of an experiment, but has "encrypted" groups, shared white board
(encrypted as well) and so on. Now, did IRSee trigger IOS and AltMe? If
not, it could it have. And if it did (of which I would be glad) then was it
because I "opened" it by exposing, not so much the code, as my coding is
intermediate at best, but by exposing the idea itself, and of course,
dumping a bunch of code onto the ML can't hurt either.
Outside of the ML I turned IRSee into a fairly powerful and inexpensive CRM
product (or at least a prototype) with additional features, none of which
you'll find on IOS, but know that if exposed the functions onto the ML, that
they would end up there sooner or later, in one form or another.
So it seems that the Rebol community is part open source, part closed. Now
some would argue that by having "closed groups" harms the RT community as a
whole, and I would say that's somewhat naive.
Rebol - Closed
IOS - Closed
AltMe - Closed
LFReD - Closed
IRSee2 - Closed
(insert your closed project here)
The Rebol community is funny in that we work on things as though we're
collaborating? I have some great functions (IMHO) which I consider too
valuable to expose. They represent time, energy and inspiration, why should
I give it away? And if I, a poor developer, have a few, then how about the
gurus? How much "black matter" is really out there?
This is what "Rebols" would address. Shared projects, shared ideas, shared
development, shared wealth.
Is that such a hard concept?