GNU-D opens up shop

[Alberto Simon]

In article <e30n4a$22ig$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, kris says...
>
>Hasan Aljudy wrote:
>[snip]
>>> That's right. But that's a different aspect altogether -- the original 
>>> question remains: why does building a set of cohesive libraries 
>>> require a new host/site? Why can't that be done on dsource.org ?
>> 
>> 
>> That's a good question.
>> I think that if you have a vision, you must be the leader in order to 
>> achieve that vision.
>> Gabe seems to have a vision, he cannot realize that vision on 
>> dsource.org, there for he's trying to create a new movement among the 
>> community, where he is the leader that directs everyone to achieve the 
>> vision that he has.
>
>Well, that's certainly a twist :)
>
>The obvious question is: why can't this "vision" be manifested at dsource?
>
>I mean, is dsource such an unruly place that nothing can possibly be 
>achieved? Are they just not worthy, over there? Or, do those currently 
>at dsource not have any notion of vision?
>
>I have this "vision" of a horde of gnarly programmers milling around at 
>dsource like pigs at a trough <g>
>
>And, why can't gabe answer these question himself? It's been asked a 
>number of times now ;)
>
>Having a "vision" is great. And, if one needs to place said vision under 
>the umbrella of some doctrine, then more power to you. However, that 
>tends to point toward one thing, and pretty much one thing only: such a 
>"vision" appears to be more about ivory-towers than about a D community 
>or the furtherment/success of D per se. Otherwise, it could happily take 
>place at the "grand cathedral" of dsource. Right?
>
>Without meaning to state the obvious, it's not as though others are not 
>currently working on a "unified vision" either - it's hardly a novel 
>idea - some of those projects even have one or two years invested thus 
>far. Is it too much trouble to get involved with those, perhaps? Are 
>they perhaps just not good enough? Is there perhaps a touch of "not 
>invented here" syndrome? Something else maybe?
>
>I'd like to think these questions have some logical and rational 
>answers, and I'd really like to see you folks join in with the effort 
>under way at dsource. Lastly, I'd like to think we won't find gnu-d with 
>its little hand in the "open" dsource cookie-jar :)
>
>- Kris

In the end, this just adds up to why to use or why not to use dsource.org. It's
all a matter of impression. Gabe want's a site where there is only one focus,
having a lot of libraries that each own has one focus doesn't give an impression
of uniformity or conformity. It's not that having a variety of libraries is bad,
but in order to develop a package you need your own page just to give the
impression that your goal is unified. Mono is both hosted in it's page and in
sourceforge, as many other projects do, but it's goals and management doesn't
occur through sourceforge (mainly) and that's probably the reason for a new
page. As someone said earlier, it isn't necessarily bad to have several pages.
In the end, using dsource to control such a large project and such a large idea,
gives an impression of constrainment and that's why I see it fit to host it on
another page. In the end, though, discussing the locality of the project
provides no benefit to whole. 

We should put our attention to more important issues like how to accomplish
everything we wan't. I come from a .NET/Java background in the sense that I'm
used to work in a coherent environment and that the tools needed to be
productive are there, every thing just works. I see D trying to accomplish those
goals but also providing a more powerful platform such that you don't have to go
back to C/C++ if you need such power. One of the things I just hate of C/C++ is
that there are countless Standard libraries and that every single project I've
seen in a company uses either a different one or one created by them. We
shouldn't let this happen to D, otherwise we wouldn't be providing anything
meaningful for those looking for an alternative to the other modern languages.
Not that there shouldn't be a lot of libraries, on the contrary, but we should
also provide a coherent framework.

I would like to ask anyone that reads what I wrote, to keep in mind that english
isn't my native language and that there could be errors in what I wrote, but try
to grasp the whole meaning of what I intended to say.

Regards,
Alberto Simoon