[Openmcl-devel] user submissions and open-sourceness

[Andrew Shalit]

Hi Peter --

thanks for sharing your thoughts.  I agree with most of what you say.   
The unfortunate issue is that we don't have the resources to undertake  
this now.

Because of the funding model of our business, we haven't been able to  
polish the IDE or make it as accessible as the MCL IDE and GUI system  
was.  We recognize that as a shortcoming, and we hope to make it  
better over time, as our funding and resources allow.

In the mean time, we are still very happy to receive contributions,  
using the limited systems we currently have in place.

Andrew

On Jun 17, 2008, at 4:02 AM, p2.edoc at googlemail.com wrote:

> At 5:15 PM -0400 08/06/16, Jeremy Jones wrote:
>> But contributing to a port in progress is much harder.  It requires a
>> lot of communication.  Even that is possible if the people doing the
>> port think that the contribution will outweigh the communication
>> overhead.  I can't think of anyone who takes the time to clearly
>> explain detailed technical issues better than Gary.  What should we  
>> be
>> doing differently?
>
> I am not inclined or qualified to tell Clozure to do anything. I'm
> sure we all have our own wish list priorities for CCL (mine are
> currently all in the UI), but Clozure are presumably so busy that
> nagging would seem counter productive.
>
> Coming to mind is an analogy - driving a car on a feeder road up to a
> major route. It can seem a challenge to stand at the edge
> contemplating joining the juggernauts as they thunder by, so it might
> help to have appropriate ramps and sign posts where it would be
> fruitful to filter in.  It can be discouraging to put effort (no
> matter how ineffectual as far as others are concerned) into some
> project only to find it missed the bus (sorry for mixing metaphors).
> Just anticipation of this could be a disincentive to those thinking
> of contributing. By this I mean that it could help if there was
> guidance as to what, where and how contributions would be welcome. It
> may be disappointing to find that our contributions are not welcome
> by Clozure (inappropriate, sub standard, worthless, duplicating, side
> effecting, intrinsically obsolescent, stupid, ...), but if we are
> self motivated we can always pursue such ventures in parallel, and
> others users might possibly find them useful.
>
> I'd like to see some sort of contributions facility. This would
> provide guidance on how to contribute, how to communicate in that
> regard, who is doing what, and a list of areas where contributions
> would be welcome.  Although CCL is free and Open Source (and how can
> anyone not be hugely grateful and motivated by that), it is the
> possession and in the control of Clozure, hence presumably any
> contributions for CCL need to be appropriate and welcomed by Clozure
> to have much chance of coming to fruition.  But that unilateral
> control also distances those that do not feel they are a part of the
> Clozure extended flock (are still on side roads).  Hence some voting
> system where everyone can make suggestions and indicate priorities
> might be useful.  Not structured so it could be any sort of style
> cramper on Clozure, rather enfranchising for potential contributors
> and users (and of course useful for Clozure).  Jeremy's survey (on
> info-mcl last year) allowed some folks to make some input, but it was
> a one shot.  I have in mind a rolling system that shows where work is
> in progress, where, when and how items are planned to be addressed,
> and the collective wish-list stretching ahead, where contribs are
> needed. The whole structured to be the least style cramping or energy
> sapping for Clozure, yet encouraging for contributors. And be a means
> by which the loud know-it-all types can be diluted by general common
> sense and goodwill.
>
> The likes of Gary's recent clarification on the x86 32bit system
> thread: [not even at the point where external feedback/testing would
> be useful.  ("It's buggy as hell!" "We know!")] is useful.  >99% of
> what I have to say about CCL, I don't, as I assume it'd be time out
> of sych with requirements (the rest is probably anyway).
>
> Just this minute I'd like such as a Who Calls facility in the UI,
> mouse-copy, curb the CCL Console window, m-. path translations that
> work out of the can, Search Files dialog, copy in the apropos and
> inspector dialogs, bracket flashing fix, process peek, non-modal
> multi-term apropos dialog, backtrace dialog inspect item mouse
> action, init file documentation, ... many more.
> Do they exist somewhere already, should I wait till they appear, how
> long will that be, should I roll my own, if so how can I do this so
> it helps others (and doesn't overlap Clozure work or other
> simultaneous wheel inventors), what do others want of them, where do
> they belong within CCL if at all, ...
>
> My top priority for CCL is robustness, and to that end it would seem
> that contributed code would be the better for being both embraced by
> Clozure and used by many. Contributions guidance would seem to help
> this cause in many ways.
>
> Not to suggest that the equivalent hasn't been elegantly worked out
> in other projects, or that this is necessarily the right time for it,
> but I get the impression there's not yet much along these lines
> available now for CCL (other than
> <http://trac.clozure.com/openmcl/wiki/ToDo>).
>
> The above a rambling 2c thought and not meant to be any demand or
> criticism of anyone (although any rolling contrib/wishlist facility
> would take effort, I think it could pay back for CCL and it's uptake).
> _______________________________________________
> Openmcl-devel mailing list
> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel