GNU-D opens up shop

[kris]

Alberto Simon wrote:
> 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 :)
>>
> 
> 

> 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. 

With respect "Alberto", dsource.org represents the majority segment of 
current D developer-group ~ globally, one might add ~ and is quite open 
by nature.

On the other hand, what's being proposed represents the ideals of one 
individual, shadowed by the auspices of the GPL. Quite different 
concepts, wouldn't you say? Quite a bit more than simply 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. 
[snip]

We keep hearing about Mono, when there's zero comparison. Mono is a 
*clone* of an existing environment. Didn't Walter explain this already?

Unfortunately, the intent here is starting to look more and more like 
some veiled effort to capitalize upon the work of others. If it were 
truly for the benefit of the D community, or for the true furtherment of 
D as a success, there would likely be no issue about making this a 
dsource project, with potentially an independent front-page. Would 
there? Instead, we see a lot of spinning and weaving around that 
particular question. And from people who apparently know little about D? 
It's almost like there's "suddenly a marketing opportunity to make a few 
bucks" ... kinda' bizarre how this is turning out.

Don't get me wrong: marketing, with a big capital 'M', would be great 
for D. But this approach, er, smells of trout. If you'll please pardon 
me for saying so?

Suggestion:

So, why not build a front-page that represents the ideals of the D 
community? Backed by dsource projects, intellect, knowledge, ideals, 
non-viral licensing, and everything else that dsource represents?

Wouldn't that perhaps better represent the D community than some 
individual who is completely new to the language and environment?

*shrug*


> 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. 
[snip]

The actual need for a cohesive library is not the issue at hand here


> 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.

Oh, you do very well. In fact, your particular command and usage of 
English is patterned just a bit too closely to that of "gabe" ;)

It is somewhat odd how many brand new NG names are coming out in support 
of "gabe" and gnu/gpl, all of a sudden. From pathlink.com also. Perhaps 
that's just a happy coincidence

Salud!

- Kris