From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac39a12d5faf5b14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 11232c,e59a9d893a249e86 X-Google-Attributes: gid11232c,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-20 10:34:17 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!unlisys!news.snafu.de!boavista!nobody From: Michael Erdmann Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,misc.misc Subject: Re: Outside view (still): Development process in the Ada community Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 19:35:38 +0200 Organization: [Posted via] Inter.net Germany GmbH Message-ID: <3CC1A6EA.5050007@snafu.de> References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <5ee5b646.0204171415.18ac5e85@posting.google.com> <99c4aee4a9ea33ca8fbe1e634b3b4f14.48257@mygate.mailgate.org> <3CBE49C4.99CFA22D@adaworks.com> <3CC05650.5060908@snafu.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: tc12-n67-132.de.inter.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22824 misc.misc:6726 Date: 2002-04-20T19:35:38+02:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > Other than issues of time and money, I don't see why it *can't* work. Here's > the thing: I could put up a web page and declare myself the Informal Ada > Conventions Consortium and declare "Henceforth, the following packages are > considered to be Official IACC standards and all Ada implementations need to > include them in order to be conformant!" What weight does it carry? > > That's why it would need some kind of committee of concerned citizens under > the aegis of SIGAda (or some other organization) with some pretty strong > willingness on the part of vendors to buy into it. In the Moment i can see only one vendor.But SIGAda may be a good idea! > The process needs to be > agile and probably needs to yield reference implementations rather than just > specifications, or it isn't likely to effectively get anything into various > compiler distributions. Yes, this is what we talked earlier about. Step 1 -Get a group together Step 2 - make a reference implementation Step 3 - distribute it with one of the most common compiler(s). > You'd like to think that perhaps it could produce > some sort of new extension to the library, say, every 6 months? Yes, follow the guideline, release early and often when you are building the reference implemenation. > That might > do a lot to make it reactive to the needs of the community & move Ada closer > to the capabilities of its competitors. > This is not all, what you need is to have some kind of crystalization point for such kind of work, in order to avoid that if a maintainer of a package drops out, a package is without any maintainer. > Of course, getting any of this off bottom-dead-center is a difficult thing. > It would require some corporate and institutional support, both for the > concept and by way of some finances. Is that likely to happen? I do not think so. In the case of the python enhancement process have hove not yet found out who is the commercial engiene. But i am not so sure if it is realy needed. I think the most important thing in the moment is the step 1, getting a groups of people together, working( not only discussing) on packages which are important to the Ada community! Regards M.Erdmann