Team Development / Exporting stuff to text files

Chipp Walters chipp at chipp.com
Mon Mar 10 00:00:09 EDT 2008


On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 7:36 AM, David Bovill <david at openpartnership.net>
wrote:

> Well to bring out my 6 shooter - it means you don't talk about code you
> supply a diff which does the talking for you.



Just so I understand better, let me get this straight: A nice cvs system
which supplies diffs will help us define a GUI for a property editor?
Perhaps you have an example as I'm having a hard time grasping this new
concept. Heck, if this works, then can we soon forgo all peace talks and let
some Open Source version control system negotiate each countries 'diffs' for
them? ;-)

> 1) Rev's already verbose language pretty much negates the necessity of
> > generic libraries. Can you state a library one would want which isn't
> > already created?
>
>
> Only around 20! To be concrete the libraries I've had to work on in the
> past
> due to a lack of community supplied libraries include:
>
>   - Jabber
>   - Google Data
>   - Google spread sheets
>   - Google docs, calendar, picassa etc
>   - KML
>   - Flickr
>   - YouTube
>   - iCal
>   - vCal
>   - Blog XMLRPC api's
>   - del.icio.us
>   - RSS / ATOM
>   - JSON
>   - OPML
>   - ....


Should I suppose the above are already Open Sourced and available to this
community? If so, please point me to the documentation and source code for
them, as I'd like to take a few for a spin.


> It is in my opinion the main disadvantage of using Rev - and the main
> reason
> I dont use Rev for web based projects is precisely the lack of robust
> tested
> community provided libraries and applications.


Perhaps it's because there just aren't enough Rev developers interested in
the above libraries? That would be my best thinking on the subject.

I wonder why. Those open source languages you mention started small with
> only a few developers - Ruby? One of the differences was that those
> developers worked together on code libraries that fed back into the
> community - while Rev projects remain individualistic. It's not the only
> factor - but Id argue it a factor.


My point was there just isn't a large enough base of developers. Even though
most of the Open Source projects I previously mentioned only started with a
few programmers, there are literally millions of C programmers in the world.
Rev has at least 2 orders of magnitude less to draw from...probably fewer.


> Agreed. Though in my oppinion RunRev would be worth far more than it is
> today if it had pursued an open source model along the lines of MySQL six
> or
> so years ago, or took a root similar to the one that FLEX / Adobe AIR have
> taken recently - I suspect they missed the boat on that one.


While you are certainly entitled to your own view, I disagree completely
with it. Like it or not, Rev has succeeded where all other xtalk platforms
have failed. They still have a valid business model which sustains their
development. Their sales numbers increase each year and they continue to
create a product, which by all measures is a significant engineering feat,
without destroying their existing developer base in the process. My hat's
off to Kevin and his team for not pursuing a doomsday scenario like the one
you have described.

To that list you could also add cgi/RevOnRockets based web applications, or
> robust flexible widgets like trees, forms and form controls, image and
> video
> widgets, outliners, image browsers, remote file browsers...


One step forward, two steps back. I thought we already had agreed, creating
easy to use generic libraries for tree widgets, remote file browsers, was
not really feasible currently without some sort of true object model. Also,
most of us have some sort of our own versions of each of these, which we can
'tune' to whatever need we want fairly quickly.


> And I'd argue that without a change in the current way stack based
> community
> development projects are supported there will be little in the way of
> community contributed web applications for RevOnRockets. Which I think we
> would both agree would be a pity.


Frankly, what motivates me to contribute to RevOnRockets, isn't what others
can or will build with it. It's what I can do with it. So, if there are no
other spin-off projects, it won't really matter to me. I do agree there
really isn't a market or any sort of ROI for these type of products in the
Rev community, and mostly they are created by the goodwill and generosity of
a few talented programmers.

David, I understand you are an Open Source advocate. I, too, enjoy the
fruits of Open Source, and here at Altuit we occasionally contribute to
different Open Source initiatives as well. It's just that for a commercial
developer, who has to pay rent at the end of the month, there is very little
which a zealous Open Source strategy can do for us.

You've touted Open Source many times on this list. Why don't you pick a
subject and try and create and promote an Open Source project of your own?
Perhaps you have and I just don't know about it. But, don't blame it on a
lack of a decent Rev cvs. I'm sure the first Open Source projects didn't
have advanced cvs tools either.

In either case, in my book, actions certainly speak louder than words.

best,
Chipp



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list