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: 103376,88ed72d98e6b3457 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-10-15 09:39:32 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!cyclone.bc.net!snoopy.risq.qc.ca!nf3.bellglobal.com!nf1.bellglobal.com!nf2.bellglobal.com!news20.bellglobal.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Warren W. Gay VE3WWG" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Standard Library Interest? References: <3F7F760E.2020901@comcast.net> <3F8035B0.7080902@noplace.com> <3F816A35.4030108@noplace.com> <3F81FBEC.9010103@noplace.com> <6Ingb.30667$541.13861@nwrdny02.gnilink.net> <3F82B4A4.5060301@noplace.com> <3F82F527.3020101@noplace.com> <3F846B5E.9080502@comcast.net> <3F855460.6020804@noplace.com> <3F86211B.103@comcast.net> <3F8640CA.6090306@noplace.com> <3F881515.4060305@noplace.com> In-Reply-To: <3F881515.4060305@noplace.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:24:37 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.96.223.163 X-Complaints-To: abuse@sympatico.ca X-Trace: news20.bellglobal.com 1066235053 198.96.223.163 (Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:24:13 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 12:24:13 EDT Organization: Bell Sympatico Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:902 Date: 2003-10-15T12:24:37-04:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > It won't work. It hasn't worked. > > If you can at *minimum* get the vendors to give you a nod that says > "Yes, if such a thing were done under the control of this organization > and with this sort of license and to some level of acceptable quality, > we'd get on board and distribute it...", then you've got something. They > don't have to commit to the library and wouldn't want to until they saw > the net result. > > But if the answer is "No. We will not now, nor will we ever distribute a > library built by this organization with that license, etc., - not unless > it is totally rammed down our throats by the end users...", then the > game is over. IFF you get this kind of answer from some, most or all of the vendors, then I would agree that you have a "point". But IMHO, this is unlikely first of all (its not in their interest to go against what the user base wants), and certainly not a foregone conclusion. Note the "FF" in "IFF". What drives the vendors, is what the "users want". Get them using your stuff. Get them wanting more of your stuff. IOW, get the users hooked first (a very time honoured principle). The vendors will fall in line from there. Demand usually drives business. Only in creative things like the Segway (sp?) where people didn't know they wanted one, does it work the other way. But I don't think the vendors are going to have any kind of a surprise for anyone on this front. ;-) -- Warren W. Gay VE3WWG http://home.cogeco.ca/~ve3wwg