Re: Source changes
CChris wrote:
> Neither, just saying that a veto is a very powerful weapon and that the fewer
> people have it, the better. Many ideas only need improvements, not a veto, and
> a dynamic, constructive community is usually a good source of them.
> You should perhaps visit other language forums/lists to get the idea.
I think lodging 'objections' to a proposed change with good documentation is
healthy. Then perhaps rationalising the objections with further discussion
and/or voting. Wiki-style is good, keeps everything together.
Ultimately, if someone wants to go off and code something that is useful to them
in their mind, the law of averages holds that it will be useful to someone else.
If it means those people have to fork off, so to speak, then wouldn't it make
sense to use the same code base and develop forks side by side, such that the
trunk is the official interpreter and you have e.g. a candidate branch, russian
branch, then a "newphoria" branch, etc etc. The forks could be released and
supported via separate websites/forums etc but still benefit from new
developments on the trunk, and possibly vice-versa creating a whole slew of
'euphoric' languages.
Gary
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
