Hacktoberfest is coming

[Richard Gaskin]

True, focusing on the subset of issues in the IDE, leaving the engine 
work to the experts on the core team, would make the work much more 
actionable.

The enthusiasm is good to see. I like the vision of a world where we all 
share one common engine and language, and have a wide range of IDE 
options available, tailored for our tastes and workflows.

If you can find a lead maintainer on this, it may be worth pursuing. But 
given the work commitment involved, that may be a big "if".

The nice thing about pinching off corners of IDE functionality in 
plugins is that the scope of work is limited to the size of the itch 
being scratched.  They're also easier to share than convincing folks to 
replace their whole IDE with an alternate one.

But if IDE bugs mount up without workarounds or acceptance long enough, 
sooner or later it will become easier to find contributors to replacing 
it with a fork.

Like the old saying goes, "Change occurs when the pain of changing is 
finally exceeded by the pain of not changing."

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Systems



Mike Kerner wrote:
> it's not the engine, it's the ide portion, which is not binary.
> in addition, as it is a fork, it would be maintained in parallel with the
> LC version, so when LC releases an update, beta or otherwise to the ide,
> you would merge it into the fork, and review all the diffs.
> in some other projects, the community fork thus becomes the major branch
> and the community becomes the major maintainers of the fork.
> i'm not saying it's easy, and i am by no means volunteering to do it.  it's
> a suggestion for the community to consider:  if we are jointly frustrated
> with LC's IDE and the progress it is making, especially in accepting and
> integrating PR's, then we do have the option of forking it, perhaps for the
> purpose of fast-tracking updates, experimental features, etc.
> things that might appeal to an audience of developers:
> * PR's issued for open bug reports, e.g. mobile scrolling (PR issued
> in...June, I think?)
> * Project Browser
> * Code folding
> * Speed in the script editor
> It's not like there aren't multiple independent projects going on that
> couldn't make this effort better.  Some of those are:
> Navigator
> Baker's Assistant
> Any of Bernd's proposed SE updates
> 
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:21 PM Richard Gaskin via use-livecode <
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> 
>> Mike Kerner wrote:
>>
>>  > there isn't any reason why we can't have a fork of the ide that
>>  > doesn't sit around waiting for themuns to say "ok".
>>
>> I've considered this myself, but maintaining something as complex as
>> LC's IDE is no small task.  In fact, I'm finding it less time consuming
>> to replace portions as I need them than to prowl around in that complex
>> code.
>>
>> But even if someone had the time for to maintain a fork of the IDE (and
>> you might get some assistance on that from others if you do), engine
>> pull requests would still be in queue with the mother ship.  Few in our
>> community have the C++ skills to do serious work on the engine, and the
>> GPL license would make using such a community project a non-starter for
>> most license holders.
>>
>> --
>>   Richard Gaskin
>>   Fourth World Systems
>>   Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
>>   ____________________________________________________________________
>>   Ambassador at FourthWorld.com                http://www.FourthWorld.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
> On the second day, God created the oceans.
> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
>    and did a little diving.
> And God said, "This is good."