Re: [wxperl-users] wxPerl Community project...

[Donovan A. <allend@Zoo.org>]

________________________________

From: Mark Dootson [mailto:mar...@zn...]
Sent: Mon 2/12/2007 6:45 PM
To: Donovan Allen
Cc: wxp...@li...
Subject: Re: [wxperl-users] wxPerl Community project...

> I guess it goes back to Huub's original mail in that a common =
repository
> for all things wxPerl would be quite nice. I have no real opinion =
about
> what the back end to this should be nor where it might be hosted other
> than that as it all ultimately depends on Mattias' work, you'd need a
> good reason not to host it at wxperl.sourceforge.net. I'm not saying
> there aren't good reasons - its just a straightforward non-loaded =
statement.

I don't have a stronge opion here.  Not sure what I said that was or =
wasn't in support of this.  However, whatever the hosting solution is, =
it must be maintable by more than one person.  I think that was one =
aspect of Huub's original concept and also why there are other wxPerl =
wiki's out there...the need for a community to be in control of it's own =
destiny.=20

> I see no reason why a wxPerlIDE couldn't live alongside work on =
specific
> applications. After all, if you believe that application 'A' is the =
way
> to go, then you're much more likely to contribute to application 'A'
> rather than 'B'. I didn't mean to disparage 'killer app' as an idea. =
Its
> just not 'application A' for me.

I really don't either.  My one concern, and only in so much as a =
community driven app, is that there are already few of us here and then =
dividing interests again will either result in longer dev time to =
product, smaller products, or large but unfiinished products.

> As for creating square wheels you may be right. I personally have
> finally got to the stage where I have a bunch of base frame and dialog
> classes that do stuff just the way I like and I don't actually use any
> dialog designer at all. (I'm still struggling with the POE question
> though so will be off to look at Eric's code shortly). But it took me =
a
> long time to get there. I figured wxPerlIDE would provide an easier
> entry point for new users from both a practical usage and example code
> point of view.

Agreed.  I see the benefits of wxPerlIDE as well and only stated that I =
personally wasn't certain it was the right killer app to meet all of the =
items on my list of what a killer app would ideally do for the =
community.   I would personally love to use it (not so much interest in =
building it tho - and if guaging the work done on other Perl IDEs is any =
indication - not usually something that more than one person has great =
motivation for).

> The Web3 stuff, of course, is born out of issues and questions that =
many
> people have to solve every working day. Perl / CPAN offers superior
> solutions to most of this already but is often not the solution of
> choice. I really do believe that wxPerl + CPAN + Perl + some snappy =
new
> framework name is a solution that could be working 'in the wild' in =
very
> short order.

Again, we agree.  My only comment is that what better way to get people =
excited about something new AND educate them on how to use it with an =
app that is a very functional example of what it does and even has =
utility purpose.  A wxPerlIDE fits the bill with every aspect except the =
exposure outside of the current and active perl community.

> Bizarely, I think that the most important part of this is the snappy =
new
> framework name - but then maybe I've just spent too much time in the
> company of people who want their solutions to be 'SOA re-architected =
in
> .NET' and are responsible for the hideous re-animation of that 1980's
> piece of corporate babble-speak, the 'paradigm shift'.

Lol.  I know...sad, but true.  We need our .NET, our AJAX, our SOAP, and =
our Rails.  We need a compelling and very high profile reason for people =
to return to perl or learn perl now.

> But I find myself digressing. Lets have 'Killer App' and 'wxPerlIDE' =
at
> a common home.

Agreed agreed agreed.  Infact, I think we agree on everything except the =
app, and even then marginally so.=20

=20