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,FREEMAIL_FROM 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-ArrivalTime: 2002-04-18 07:04:05 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: tatebll@aol.com (Bill Tate) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Rant! (was) Development process in the Ada community Date: 18 Apr 2002 07:04:04 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: References: <3CB46975.90408@snafu.de> <3CB77A6B.5090504@snafu.de> <184076622a7c648f157c56e417bd86d4.48257@mygate.mailgate.org> <3CB9375F.8040904@snafu.de> <3CBC56F0.9050300@snafu.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.207.81 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1019138645 12375 127.0.0.1 (18 Apr 2002 14:04:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Apr 2002 14:04:05 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:22721 Date: 2002-04-18T14:04:05+00:00 List-Id: Michael Erdmann wrote in message > > If we had some community concensus that one or more libraries was what we [snip] > > wanted for doing job X, all you'd have to do is persuade the vendors to > > distribute it with their compilers and it instantly becomes part of Ada even > > if it isn't part of the "standard". > > I dont think that we need the vendors this mutch, most of the popular > open source software is distributed without them (thanks to sites > as sourceforge etc..), > > In my mind the idea of a public ada process is showing up: > > - There is a job to be done and i have some solution for it. Propose > the solution to the community (who is this, i gues comp.lang.ada?) > > - If sufficient interest has been raised, form a working group > for this topic and provide an implemenation for public use. > > - Proceed until wide acceptance > > - Propose to ISO > Michael, I would like to echo some of your points from an outsider's perspective. As someone who spends most of his time on comp.lang.python, Python suffers from some of the same "kinds" of perceptions (erroneous or otherwise) as Ada does, e.g., degree of acceptance, availability of developers, etc. However, Python does have considerable "traction" and "energy" in terms of its direction and the process for moving new features into its standard "core." While ISO adoption isn't part of the python agenda, the Python Evaluation Process (PEP) seems to fill the bill that your comments suggest. A specific PEP garners no shortage of posts from the devoted. Wide-spread use including version updates most often lead to incorporation into the standard distribution. Its the latter that seems to be the threshold that needs to be achieved for widespread community acceptance. WRT Ada and the ISO process, this would seem to be, at least, one logical jumping off point since many of the "important" battles would likely have already been fought and resolved. Information on the PEP process is available from www.python.org. Hopefully you wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel (too much) in order to adopt a process that would work for your community instead of the other way around - like the python language itself, this is something that borders on religious dogma in the python community. Hopefully this is of some use. cheers, Bill