[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?

From: Ian Duggan
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] is there demand for itla?
Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 20:39:14 -0800
User-agent: KMail/1.5.3

On Sunday 16 November 2003 07:04 pm, you wrote:
> is _comparitively_ (far from perfectly) specified language.  ITLA will
> port fairly easily across many implementations, present and future.

Excellent. I was googling on that but wasn't sure of the number of platforms 
that supported it. If you can run it on unix, windows and mac, then my only 
real concern is gone.

>     > If Arch truly is at a crossroads and attention/money is what
>     > will move it forward, then we should focus on these things.
> Got any clever ideas :-)?

Well I thought was one. :)

At any rate, I think that increasing userbase is best route to acceptance, and 
again, lowering barrier to entry. Currently, Unix only+ Tutorial + Basic 
Knowlege of distributed source control is rather high. Many projects have a 
few non-unix people who need access.

Another idea might be something like an open logging server simliar to bkbits. 
That sort of thing makes it easy to gauge the kind of community the system 
has. Maybe since arch is a gnu project, something like this could be added to 

> I've followed for quite a while.  I don't think it will
> cut for lots of reasons that would be impolitic to enumerate.  It's a
> nice theory.
> is another one.

I'm curious as to why? Maybe email me privately? I found them through 
BitTorrent who was funded by them at some point. Are there conditions 
attached to the funding aside from needing to have an open source license and 
be related to Linux/Open Source. Seems to fit the bill.

>     > 2) Windows port. This is a big one.
> I side with those who say that the only reason to offer windows
> support for anything is purely tactical: the immediate, tangible
> payoff has to be higher than the cost.

Tactical, yes, (we are strategizing, no?) but practical too. A distributed 
system really needs to run on multiple platforms. It's a lot easier to port  
a product than to get my colleagues to switch to linux. I guess it depends on 
who you hope to have using arch. I think the larger the target, the more 

Likewise, features which distinguish you from other systems are key. Of the 
systems I mentioned before, only BK and SVN have windows ports. Even if the 
arch developers would never use windows, it's one more checkbox that is 
usually high on the list of reasons to use something else. It's the only 
thing that keeps me from using some of those others.

> If I could sum it up in a sentence or two I would.
> From your perspective, I think you have to note that I've resisted a
> heck of a lot of suggestions since early 2002 and the net result is
> that people like you are lately more interested in arch.  Even if you
> can't quite resolve the pattern in your field of vision, you should be
> able to tell that there is a coherent and potent pattern there.

Yes, it's clear to me that you have a vision. That's a big plus for me. 
Converting on a vision requires being able to clearly communicate that vision 
to others and motivating them to follow it. I guess I could read the archives 
of everything since 2002 and develop a "part of the vision"/"not part of the 
vision" dichotomy but I was hoping for something more succinct.

-- Ian

Ian Duggan    address@hidden                    

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]