REBOL3 - PowerPack (discussions about RP [web-public])

Return to Index Page
Most recent messages (300 max) are listed first.

152AntonOk, I'll wait for that, then. :)11-May-07 9:49
151MarioThe script loads the data file that contains info on the files and how to download handle them. Archives are usually downloaded and unpacked. You just have to put both files in a directory and run the script.11-May-07 6:55
150MarioAnton: if you are interested in "my" collection it is just one script with a data file and I plan to make it available via rebol.it11-May-07 6:53
149AntonI would be interested in the list of scripts you use, where you place them, and how you use them. I probably wouldn't just download and install your entire config as I have established my own ways of working. I would inspect each piece and see if it has value to me.11-May-07 5:37
148MarioIf someone is interested please let me know10-May-07 19:09
147MarioI am working on a "starterpack" when I find some time. It simply downloads the scripts I found useful or very interesting but they are not really managed/organised but for I put them in different directories depending on their main purpose10-May-07 19:04
146AntonI'm interested, but I am afraid that I will disagree with other people who have different ideas about what is the best way to implement a library/module system - therefore I am cautious before spending too much time here.21-Apr-07 5:27
145GreggThere's a new private chat group. I'll add you to it.20-Apr-07 18:32
144Maximwe are converging all prior efforts and their originators into a single concerted effort.20-Apr-07 18:32
143HenrikI haven't followed the group too closely, but are the rules and the model for libraries and modules made?20-Apr-07 18:30
142Henrikyes20-Apr-07 18:29
141GreggIs anyone in this group still interested in a more serious REBOL repository? May be adjunct to, or something else, but targeted at a more consistent model for libraries and modules, so things are easier to INCLUDE and reuse.20-Apr-07 17:40
140Claude.8-Sep-06 21:06
139yeksoonI will look into getting the Powerpack going.

I will need to spend some time reading through the archives to ensure that the original objective remains clear. That should help serve as the guidelines for making decisions down the road.

25-May-06 8:13
138Terrynot sure if this was mentioned earlier, but someone said that Uniserve is GPL.. it's not.. it's BSD24-May-06 23:38
137GreggBut a lot of us like the idea. Maybe we can sneak some info out of the R3 team about how best to go about it, WRT modules and such.24-May-06 23:34
136MaartenYou just became one-man project-lead/implementer ;-) I never got to it.24-May-06 16:54
135yeksoonpinging for update.

if work has stopped for Powerpack, I would be glad to pick up part of the job here.

24-May-06 9:10
134Thr.4-Apr-06 19:15
133GrahamI'm looking for a bunch of "certified" software that can be used for setting up webservers, cgi, blogs, mail, pop etc.8-Feb-06 8:18
132GrahamWhat's happening with the PowerPack?8-Feb-06 8:17
131yeksoonI change the name to 'PowerPack' instead of 'Rebol powerpack' ..

it makes it easier to see the name of this group ... hope no one objects

22-Dec-05 2:18
130yeksoonis there a site for PowerPack..where I can have a look at what it encompasses?21-Dec-05 8:06
129yeksoon.21-Dec-05 7:58
128DideCThe session deamon is not necessary at all AFAIK. 3.5 is not released yet, so the doc. But French community will translate ASAP as it does last time, I hope.28-Jun-05 21:16
127MaartenI need graphics support for the REBOL Powerpack reb site! If you have a backdrop, image, folder icon, .... please send them to me. See contact details here for the mail address.28-Jun-05 19:25
126MaartenJust did. Magic has a nice set of HTML functions but the drawback is that you need a daemon for session management, which won't work in a shared hosting env and is harder to keep alive. But is seems a bit more complete, so provided that you'll do the 3.5 translation as well I'd be happy to include it.28-Jun-05 19:23
125DideCI just know RSP by its name. If you know it, just compare to Magic!!28-Jun-05 19:20
124yeksoon+1 for Magic!28-Jun-05 15:11
123MaartenSo the question is: RSP or Magic!28-Jun-05 13:16
122shadwolfMagic doc is yet translated and available on Gram Chiu Comkarori28-Jun-05 12:38
121DideCTranslation: we will do.

There is also RUn (Rebol Unit) from Christophe Coussement (RebolTof). Java Unit, Rebol made.

28-Jun-05 12:17
120MaartenOK, who will translate.... Right now I am leaning towards including RSP by Laurent Chevalier.28-Jun-05 10:32
119DideCbefore=first :\28-Jun-05 9:36
118DideCOlivier Auverlot proposes to add its Magic! script to the Powerpack. Magic! is a CGI handler that dramaticaly simplify the creation of dynamic web site " la" PHP. Version 3.5 is in the pipeline and will be release soon. But doc is in French AFAIK, so need to be translate before.28-Jun-05 9:36
117Guestis there anything close to ruby rails wrt automatically defing MySQL CRUD operations ? I find rails really cool, something Rebol could easily do !!30-May-05 6:39
116MaartenMeanwhile.... send me your code that is BSD licensed and well documented!28-May-05 20:39
115MaartenThe way it looks now is that the Viewtop in 1.3 will have a place that can be used by RP. This solves a lot of problems in terms of version managemet and accessibility.28-May-05 20:39
114MaartenWrt library system: in time there might be a library system in RP, but any componet will be self-contained. Otherwise you end up being forced to use a bloated library whenall you need is just a small subset of functions.28-May-05 20:37
113MaartenSome remarks: wrt licensing, RP components will be BSD based. RP should help you jump-start and it only does that if you can use it in all circumstances. No need for discussion about that (how nice to be a benevolent dictator ;-)28-May-05 20:36
112BrianWI agree, absolutely. I'd like to see something like perl-style runtime 'require/import/use' semantics, even if it's just in a wrapped-rebol app.28-May-05 20:26
111AmmonYeah, but we need more than that28-May-05 20:23
110BrianWThere's the preprocessor setup in Rebol/SDK.28-May-05 20:16
109GreggI agree shadwolf. The need for a library system points to the more general need of how to structure larger REBOL projects.28-May-05 18:21
108shadwolfif people now the code scruture it's easy for them to work with a sigle hudge file if people don't know the file scruture it's hard for them to locate the place where they have to act (adding code, fixing bugs)28-May-05 18:13
107shadwolf2 hundred ,28-May-05 18:12
106shadwolfyou don't handle one file with more than 2 thousand lines than several files with at max 200 hundred lines ;)28-May-05 18:11
105shadwolfhum having all in one file until it's not a stable release complicates a lot the search and find for bugs ...28-May-05 18:10
104RobertAs already said, I see some parallels to the RPC idea. And as Ashley said, quality matters, and the ultimate test is to see if the stuff is used. So, just throwing together some cool stuff and hoping that's it isn't enough. I really would like to see this effort merged into the RPC idea. This would avoid this licensing discussion too.28-May-05 7:04
103RobertAnd libraries must be compatible. The current running RebGUI projects is a good example. Feedback loop is fast, releases are done often (thanks to Ashley) and momentum is raising.28-May-05 7:01
102RobertOne major point wasn't said: We need a library system to handle all this. I won't use code, where I need to 'do zillions of single files in a specific order, handle path and lookup things, need local sub-directories to load images etc.

I'm still using Slim on my xpeers system, because that's the only thing I know about that handles all this quite well. And I can tell you, it pays off. Something like this is required.

28-May-05 6:59
101shadwolfI yet expose my way to think .... As many people are not playing the same game and as software is an industry we need to make a difference betwin what is donate and what is the fruit of the industry that's all in fact ... People who want to choose what ever licence they want no body can contest this or arg a licence is better than another without thinking what is behind this ...27-May-05 22:17
100GrahamI think we should consider moving licensing discussions to the licensing channel ...27-May-05 21:13
99shadwolfif we take MacOS X example we all know what is the gain for Apple but it is more blur to see what is the befefit that OpenBSD project writers retrieves of this experience. A part a spot light put uppon there project. But every a little serrious coder was yet knowing that freeBSD and OpenBSD were rock stable OS27-May-05 20:56
98shadwolfyou are free to use free to modify free to distribute free to work with the author isn't that enough franckly ?27-May-05 20:51
97shadwolfinvented27-May-05 20:50
96shadwolfyou can make free to use things and do not want people to claim what they don't have27-May-05 20:46
95shadwolfproperty and robe are the base of our culture read the bibble it's full of those deprecated concepts ...27-May-05 20:41
94shadwolfbasicly Free means the author is free to choose the licence of his creation ... You can't contest the right of an author to protect his creation ... Offerring the use and sharing the code is yet a great thing .. And with GPL you can work on the creation as you want until you respect the licence terms and do not want to appropriate a creation that doesn't belongs to you ;)27-May-05 20:40
93Volker(i guess licensing could be a very good base for a soap opera, thought :)27-May-05 20:37
92BrianHHey, at least it mattered in this case :)27-May-05 20:34
91Volker:))27-May-05 20:33
90ScottTand from what I've read, the only thing that really weighs on him is a bunch of soap opera caliber licensing discussions, which I can now say that I participated in. . .oh well. guess I'll have to label that button hot, I generally avoid that discussion.27-May-05 20:32
89VolkerYes. Also, rebol shows a lot of its source, even if officially closed. thats a lot of the "good old informal way" before GPL was needed. :)27-May-05 20:32
88ScottTyeah, I like the REBOL licensing schemes so far. As long as Carl gets to do what he wants, then I'll be happy.27-May-05 20:31
87VolkerAFAIK the community is a bit more BSD, but Carl not, and GPL means he will not use it. Thats a heavy argument.27-May-05 20:30
86BrianHThe REBOL community in general seems to be more pro-BSD anyways, if only to accept use of the proprietary software that is REBOL itself.27-May-05 20:25
85Volkerits ok to have another opinion than me btw ;)27-May-05 20:24
84ScottTand I could have skipped straight to the documentation discussion.27-May-05 20:23
83ScottTit was really just a passing thought27-May-05 20:23
82VolkerI agree about good point. but the posting said nothing about its gpl, but we want bsd. it started flaming against gpl, that was all. so i responded to that.. ;)27-May-05 20:23
81VolkerNo, linux allows explicitely running closed stuff on it. it does not allow closed stuff in it, there you are right. which relates to some video-drivers.27-May-05 20:21
80BrianHScottT, if the REBOL powerpack spec doesn't allow GPL restrictions, then it doesn't. Good point.27-May-05 20:21
79ScottTGNU can continue to develop the term "free" so long as they prefix all gnuWords with gnuPrefixes so everyone gnu:knows what one is gnu:talking-about27-May-05 20:21
78VolkerThe BSD-free, you are right, is old. at that time the GPL was standard, just not written. if you asked someone how something worked, you got answer, examples, etc. was a closed group, such programmers, no need to think big about licensing.27-May-05 20:20
77BrianHBad example with the Linux kernel. Their license really doesn't allow that kind of binary linking, but that restriction is just not enforced that much because the linking is usually done locally.27-May-05 20:20
76VolkerIIRC uniserve has some style of classpath. That is, it allows to add cgis etc not to be gpl. based on this "its on arms length" or something like that? not sure.27-May-05 20:19
75ScottTI wish I would not have said anything about licensing, but I saw uniserver on the list and it's gpl. that doesn't mean BSD, which was part of the spec. I like BSD MIT school of thinking. My brain doesn't jive with GNUfree the old free was just fine.27-May-05 20:19
74VolkerOr make a clear cut about which part you want freedom. as with classpath, or linux-kernel where you can run closed stuff on.27-May-05 20:18
73BrianHI think that Classpath-style would be best for Uniserve, but that may be just me.27-May-05 20:17
72VolkerScottH - choosing one of two ways. either passing the freedom by giving your changes away, or to pay the GPL-part coder with some of the money you get. As you would do if you hired a coder to do that part.27-May-05 20:16
71BrianHI just use BSD for code I just don't care about at all, or for code that I want everyone to use, whether they are Jedi or Sith :)27-May-05 20:16
70VolkerAFAIK the GPL-attorneys are thinking about the dual-license-line too.27-May-05 20:14
69ScottTwhat?27-May-05 20:14
68VolkerBrianH, i agree.27-May-05 20:13
67VolkerWell, you said "To understand how to use a moderately complex system like a full-featured web server, it is going to be important to capture the thinking of those who wrote the code.". and then you want to force your users not to look at it?27-May-05 20:13
66BrianHPersonally, I like the dual GPL/commercial licenses, where you must pay money to be allowed to restrict your users. Either that or the Classpath-style GPL with linking exception, for those that don't care about the freedom down the line, but do care about contributions to the library itself.27-May-05 20:12
65ScottTto me27-May-05 20:11
64ScottTthe issue with free is not about money27-May-05 20:11
63Volkerif you make an actuall product, i guess your base contributors would like some money too.27-May-05 20:11
62ScottTand anything longer than one page is done out of personal principle27-May-05 20:11
61ScottTyep, but I started coding long before I understood anything about licensing.27-May-05 20:10
60Volkeryou will not find GPL "somewhere" then.27-May-05 20:10
59Volkeri guess that is why GPL forces you to make everything GPL up front.27-May-05 20:09
58ScottTnot "free" enough in a hobbyist sense.27-May-05 20:09
57ScottTthat's a deal breaker for me and I bounce the gpl stuff.27-May-05 20:09
56ScottTIf I would have known beforehand the restrictions that gpl would place not only on me, but that I would be forced to pass on. . .27-May-05 20:09
55ScottTwell, it sorta does. because what if I want to release something someday as an actual product, and I go digging around trying to figure out what is what and I find gpl in there alongside bsd.27-May-05 20:07
54Volkerthen GPL or BSD should make no difference to you?27-May-05 20:05
53ScottTt bug me about it.27-May-05 20:04
52ScottTyeah, well, I'm a hobbyist. I write a lot of code that I don't mind people using however they like so long as they don27-May-05 20:04
51Volkerwhile closed means, you can go to the central commitee of **, politely inform them and hope they dont jail you.27-May-05 20:02
50VolkerGPL says nothing about "not paid". It says, if your * breaks you can go to everyone who can repair *. be * car, refridgerator or some softwarre.27-May-05 20:00
49VolkerBSD guys may think "ah, but you are a coder! much more like us. about the users, well.." ;)27-May-05 19:58
48ScottTvery good. crazy dual star that free as in spirit <--> free as in not paid.27-May-05 19:58
47VolkerBut use has to be restrict somehow. either your use, or the use of your users. some people think its better to restrict nobody except the restricters. means you in this case.27-May-05 19:57
46Volkerjailable: taking free software, change a bit, close it. BSD. paid: yes. goto DcKimbel, say "your Uniserv is wooonderfull!! How many bucks". I am sure you can make a deal and jail - uhm, close your project as much as you want.27-May-05 19:56
45ScottTit is coercive in the same way EULA is27-May-05 19:56
44ScottTno, I am saying that any software that purports to be "free" should not restrict my use. It is not free if it forces me into a box.27-May-05 19:55
43BrianHFor that matter, what do you mean by software being paid. Do you mean paid for?27-May-05 19:53
42ScottTwhat do you mean by jailable. not a term I am familiar with regarding software.27-May-05 19:51
41VolkerBSD->GPL works pretty well. GPL->special license agreement will work pretty well to. But jaillable software usually has to be paid.27-May-05 19:51
40VolkerBSD allows jailing free birds. GPL forces to let them go free next spring :) and only if they want to go with their binary offsprings.27-May-05 19:49
39ScottTwas all I was saying. I don't mind that uniserv is gpl, but thing gpl incompatible with BSD27-May-05 19:49
38ScottTBSD is good. GPL is not.27-May-05 19:48
37Volkerbut if you close free software, it is not free to your users, so restricted, which it should not be?27-May-05 19:47
36ScottTUniserve is very nice, I have been using it to prototype/test before I upload to actual server. It broke my heart it was gpl. BSD is very good choice. Free software should not be restricted, and GPL has too many of those. makedoc/spec is the killer app, and in that intensional programming vein is coursing all the best documentation, and REBOL does a fine job of documenting itself because it is so semantic by nature. To understand how to use a moderately complex system like a full-featured web server, it is going to be important to capture the thinking of those who wrote the code. REBOL parsing allows all information pertaining to the code to be right there with the code, and a function of DO -ing anything. the standard documentation scheme should follow how REBOL [] headers work, and simply have the makedoc embedded within the scripts.27-May-05 19:44
35HenrikI'm building some extensions for pdfmaker so that might be a good one24-May-05 15:02
34Volkerdon't forget make-doc! :)) and maybe pdfmaker?24-May-05 14:49
33PeterWoodRebol on Rockets!!!24-May-05 14:04
32MaartenYep, thanks24-May-05 13:52
31JaimeVargasMarteen I think RebDB should also be part of the RP.24-May-05 13:30
30Willwow, looking at the video 12:21
29Graham .. I was just reading Yeksoon's reference above.24-May-05 11:37
28Maarten"rails" ?24-May-05 11:29
27GrahamCan Uniserve be used for a "rails" implementation?24-May-05 10:46
26GrahamDocs Uniserve is GPL'd ..24-May-05 10:45
25MaartenThat's why I am doing this. I will start as Strong Leader, simply to make a Fast Start. Once the powerpack is well-established others may (and probably want to) join.24-May-05 10:43
24yeksoonI will just addon..with the vaious 'powerpacks' in place.. it is possible to build something similiar to 'Ruby on Rails'

I believe the French community already have some well defined framework called Magic!... and we have Temple(?) lying around somewhere.

24-May-05 6:22
23SunandaGood points, Maarten about accessibility.

If I were looking for an alternative REBOL GUI and typed REBOL GUI into Google, I'd probably soon conclude that there wasn't one. And that might end my evaluation of REBOL.

Having many useful tools scattered across personal websites has other weaknesses too -- look at how hard it's been for people to find Gavin MacKenzies's XML libraries after his personal website went offline.

24-May-05 6:10
22MaartenNote that RP will be bundling all those good (proven?) libs and make them accessible from one place. Your rebgui, but also mysql:// are excellent examples. But imagine your new to REBOL, wouldn't it be nice if there were a link on /.com that gave you immediate access to these libs?24-May-05 5:39
21MaartenAshley: I have talked with Robert already24-May-05 5:37
20shadwolfthe inter documentation referecing is too a weak point some needed concept are maybe availlable yet some where but then you need to specify it into your documentation to orient the reader :)24-May-05 4:31
19shadwolfSo know synthetising the informations on our forum to make it disponnible for every one is a very very hudge task (more than 20 000 topics it's hard to sort and put in value ...)24-May-05 4:29
18shadwolffor example on french scene forum the amount of information on rebol coding is so high that we can't easyly synthetise it into a meanning documentation. Why ? because structural we choose a forum based interface betwin coders without taking strictly the time to produce a syntetic documentation for every issues that were submitted and discussed on the solution apported from the very beginning (a participant number issue is in the scope too )24-May-05 4:27
17shadwolfbut the weak point is that REBOL coding is so gorgeous that you mmost of the time prefer spend your free time to make script than documenting them ;)24-May-05 4:22
16shadwolfa good documentation must respond to all type of question and knowledge ... Using cooperativ dynamic writing/publishing tools other to redactors and readers a close interaction if you read a documentation and steel have questions you can mail, altme, or forum the redactors to makes your ask in order for them to bettering the documentation very fast24-May-05 4:21
15shadwolfDocumentation is different from the level of knowledge of the reader24-May-05 4:17
14shadwolfinformatical documentation in general are very close to math ones. You can't aquiere new concept in geometry without have the spacial illustration of what you get explained more longer in the text. :)24-May-05 4:16
13shadwolfAshley I'm Absolutly agreed with your point of view !!! The way to participate actively to a project can take a lot of shapes. 1) make doc 2) making code optimisation 3) adding brand new code 4) debugging 5) giving feedbacks and needs 6) making translation 7) making sample code (as far as I saw in my peronnal experience it's easier to understand how to use a thing if you provide a sample code that's an illustration not a goal. Sample code alone are only accessible to yet powerred users. Documentation without sample code is abstract. That's for example what I like in the rebol documentation diccionnary it explains and shows you concretly little sample to pretty understand the cancept explain... Making good doc is a hard and painfull task ... If it belongs only to one people my personnal expirence shows me that the effort is not made along a long time... so it's obvious that we need a doc commity where people emulates each others and fixe periodically new goals. In French speaking community we all share teh same point of view that' why we try to put at disposal of all the people some usefull tools like a dokuwiki in and doc collectors in and our public is french speaking mainly but we are so few that we can't say hey our tools are for french speaking people only. So if those tools seems you usefull for any project and any information sharing or cooperative work go ahead use them ;)24-May-05 4:13
12AshleyHave a chat, if you haven't already, to Robert about the RPC as there may be some overlap in efforts. I'm more than happy to work with you to ensure RebGUI fits the proposed model (from both a code and documentation perspective). Some things to consider:

- Coding standard(s) - Documentation standard(s) - Optimization methodology - Testing methodology - REBOL baseline (I'd aim for 1.3 - forget the past)

I've said this to a few people on AltME already, but for this type of project to succeed it needs four things:

1) Technology (including a sound & easily understood conceptual basis) 2) Documentation (good documentation is better than good code) 3) Momentum (a sense that things are happening) 4) Community (an environment where people are encouraged to contribute)

Getting all four right is *hard* work. *My* definition of success for a project is to be able to answer YES to the following two questions:

1) Does it work? 2) Is it used?

24-May-05 1:50
11shadwolfGreat idea ;)23-May-05 21:40
10SunandaGreat idea. Thanks for setting it up.23-May-05 20:45
9BrianWcool23-May-05 20:22
8MaartenLet's rock!23-May-05 19:33
7MaartenThink Activestate Perl/TCL/Python, the REBOL way.23-May-05 19:33
6Maarten< your contribution here>23-May-05 19:33
5Maarten- Roxy23-May-05 19:32
4MaartenSome candidates *right now* are: - mysql:// -postgres:// -Uniserve -Rugby (of course ;-) -REBgui -cgi + cookie libs -async http:// -async://23-May-05 19:32
3MaartenThe powerpack has Carl's blessing. The idea is to provide a quality assured set of libraries that can help (semi-)professional developers to get things done.23-May-05 19:32
2MaartenI am the lead (and have been working on this some time). Any code that you have that you want included you can send to me by email.23-May-05 19:31
1MaartenTo become part of the RP a library will need to adhere to these requirements: - BSD license - docs in HTML/makedoc - code accepted by RP lead23-May-05 19:30

Return to Index Page