Hi jb,
At 04:19 PM 1/19/00 -0600, you wrote:
>
>Elan offers:
>
>> ...perhaps we should pracitcally demonstrate our commitment and
>> ability to implement OpenSource REBOL related production quality code.
>> Otherwise, it just looks like alot of hot air, no?
>
>Part of the reason that you aren't seeing a plethora of solid,
commercial-grade
>Web apps in Rebol is the lack of key functionality, like database
connectivity
>and external application / system interfaces.
Since you bring it up, I thought it was lack of GUI support? :-)
>Perhaps when those arrive,
>you'll see a renaissance of small, cool, fast Web apps written simply in
Rebol.
Wonderful. Isn't OpenSource all about volunteers providing commercial
quality software? Why then do you delegate the functionality you are
desperately seeking back to REBOL Tech?
>
>> Wouldn't it be time to launch an OpenSource project to implement a
>> REBOL extension that uses REBOL's ports mechanism to connect to dbms's that
>> support ODBC? ...isn't it time to implement an OpenSource ports-based
MySQL
>> interface?
>
>This would be kind of silly
Oh, yes. Would it?
>when, according to a press release from early fall
>(if I remember correctly, it seems to have disappeared from the Website?)
>/COMMAND was supposed to include this kind of functionality in a "standard"
>way, and was supposed to be available in early release form before now?
>
>Does it really make sense to invent an idiosyncratic 3rd-party API for
>something
Certainly not. But I didn't propose that what we invent be idiosyncratic. I
agree with you. Let's not make it idiosyncratic. Ok?
>when it is going to be obsoleted by technology that's already been
>announced by the tools vendor in question?
I don't understand. On the one hand, we get people proposing that the whole
REBOL interpreter become OpenSource. What for, if not for continued
development? Wouldn't the continued OpenSource development include
functions that the "tool vendor" intends to eventually implement? I should
hope so.
Looks to me like your argument doesn't accomplish much more than call the
whole OpenSource approach silly:
If REBOL went OpenSource, everyone but REBOL Tech is allowed to continue
developing it? If they continue working on the development, then OpenSource
efforts or idiosyncratic and obsolete?
As long as REBOL Tech continues developing REBOL, there is no possibility
of adding functinality to REBOL as OpenSource projects?
What you're saying is not making that much sense to me. Perhaps REBOL Tech
would want to integrate OpenSource extensions into the official
distribution?
;- Elan >> [: - )]
