ANNOUNCEMENT: GNU-D opens up shop

[Gabe McArthur]

In article <e2uvsh$22kt$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>Kyle Furlong wrote:
>> I think we can reasonably say... TROLL ALERT. Everyone, for Bob's sake, 
>> just go to www.dsource.org, pick a project or start your own, and get to 
>> work.

I haven't really overlooked dsource.org.  In fact I've been going over it quite
a bit.  I really like what dsource is trying to accomplish, and I'm not trying
to overshadow them or detract from what they are doing.  Instead, I want to put
a spotlight on a problem in a way that the relatively loose collection of
libraries on dsource simply doesn't address -- namely, bringing many people
together around one project -- a project who's sole focus is usability.

Frankly, I think you're all pretty fantastic for working so hard on D -- it's a
labor of love for many of you and you should feel exceptionally proud.  You are
all competent professionals that love to explore new avenues and work towards
making D a better language.

However, for everyone else out there -- everyone who isn't a born programmer --
I feel that what D really needs is an entry-level configuration for would-be D
hackers: something that 'just works'.  Look at Java and Mono -- these
languages/libraries aren't just succeeding because they have great communities
or prolific resources -- they're succeeding because they package together good
tools, inteligent ideas, huge libraries, and wonderful documentation into one
place.  And they live by setting project goals!  Everybody's contributions are
being fed back into one location, one repository, one central nexus of talent
and development.  In this sense, one might consider dsource a wonderful
kaliedescope of talent and libraries, but what is probalby needed is a laser: a
focus and direction to the whole project with mesurable goals and specific
timelines.  (You can see from the current development of the gcd, things seem to
be somewhat in the air in terms of maintaining contact and getting people
organized.)

As for the liscensing issue, well, I came to the LGPL and GPL after looking
through some of the dsource libraries and wondering at some of the liscenses
(Ares, I discovered after questioning, should be under a kind of BSD liscense).
I don't want there to be any question about the status of the gnu-d.org library.
I really want people to feel that they can take what gets put up and do whatever
they want with it, as long as they realize that the code isn't a personal right
but a public ownership best served by having everyone involved.  Besides, it
isn't necessarily handed down from on high that everything has to be under the
LGPL (though the core library probably should be), as the community may decide
that the MIT or BSD liscense will be sufficient in certain circumstances.  But,
there again is part of my point: put a laser beam focus on what needs to be done
and do that one thing well -- as a community.

And, just as an aside, I would like to say that just as many people here are
disturbed by the power of the GPL, there are many, many other people in the
world who hack every day under the ideal of free software.  It's these dedicated
individuals that I would like gnu-d.org to appeal to, as well.  The lack of a
direct mission statement on the D website and a lack of explicit liscensing for
every D component, I feel, is currently inhibiting some people who might
otherwise join up.  (It might be unfair, but some people figure if they have to
ask about what liscense it's under, they probably don't even want to know.)

To summarize: timelines, community, docuemntation, and packaging.  I think these
should be some of the primary goals of gnu-d.org

If you want to join, great!  I know that I would love to have the company.  If
not, then no hard feelings -- you're still doing great work for D, and that's
what's really important!

Salud,
Gabe