<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stephane.ducasse@inria.fr">stephane.ducasse@inria.fr</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
On Mar 30, 2012, at 9:50 PM, <a href="mailto:phil@highoctane.be">phil@highoctane.be</a> wrote:<br>
<br>
> This is a chicken and egg problem.<br>
> And a popularity contest game as well.<br>
><br>
> Without one click, you'll piss people off fast and they'll go look elsewhere. Then you loose traction and that's bad.<br>
><br>
> If I didn't had one click, I wouldn't have been learning as fast as I've been.<br>
<br>
I agree with you.<br>
<br>
> Now I do have all pieces from different locations (even wanting to build the VM on my own).<br>
><br>
> For contrast, look at another community I am part of: Tiki Wiki CMS Groupware. The system is topping SourceForge number of downloads, committers, and is a general success for intranets in companies.<br>
><br>
> Of course, the paradigm isn't pure at all, but easy enough to have a lot of people contributing good stuff.<br>
><br>
> We are at version 9 and I don't know any other package that is as feature rich when it comes to the web.<br>
> We are talking more than a million lines of code here.<br>
> Now, we are moving further than one click: hosting providers provide a full VM with everything installed for the stack.<br>
><br>
> As of software developers, I do view 4 categories:<br>
><br>
> - constructivists using established abstractions and not requiring further exposure to inner workings of the system. They deliver business value for common problems.<br>
> - bridges understanding how the system works inside and are able to convey usage patterns to the constructivists. They also feed back real world usage problems to the next kind so that the system stays useful and not pie in the skyish.<br>
> - abstractionists: able to come up with a powerful set of abstractions to solve a given problem in a general manner. Framework makers are here<br>
> - technology makers: create core tech. Like a Cog-VM thing, CUDA, ..<br>
><br>
> Try to pair types by jumping one strata and you are asking for trouble.<br>
><br>
> Except for rare seasoned developers that are master of their craft and are able to display behavioral flexibility.<br>
> But these are a rare breed and you won't get them for a long time anyway as these are seekers.<br>
<br>
I want a good installer for each platform :)<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>For newspeak there is a native installer for Mac OS and Windows. See <a href="http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog/nscogbuild/cygwinbuild/installer">http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog/nscogbuild/cygwinbuild/installer</a> & <a href="http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog/nscogbuild/macbuild/installer">http://www.squeakvm.org/svn/squeak/branches/Cog/nscogbuild/macbuild/installer</a>. These allow one to install whatever one specifies using a native installer. The WIndows code is a little hairy and the Mac OS code is very simple. So if you consider a native installer a good introductory choice (it doesn't have to be the only one) then take a look. I can help with anyone trying to tailor to the WIndows installer.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
And I want to let a chance to people to decide when they have to deal with low level.<br>
Pushing shit on their faces as a welcome message is not what we want.<br>
<br>
Now alex shipping cairo lib may be not be the best to do. It tooks some time to compile on my machine<br>
and it means some work to build the right libr for each sub platforms: 32, 64…..<br>
<br>
Now you can also use VW. :) For me this is simply no way. ;)<br>
<br>
Stef<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>best,<div>Eliot</div><br>