Re: (problem? 'guile)

[Michael Vanier <mvanier@bbb.caltech.edu>]

> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 02:38:22 -0500 (EST)
> From: Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk@cs.brown.edu>
> 
> MJ Ray wrote:
> 
> > There is much tosh being spoken about Free Software on this list.  
> 
> There is virtually no tosh being spoken about Free Software on this
> list.  The topic rarely comes up, if ever.  Perhaps you're confusing
> this list for some other venue.  Even then, I've spoken against Open
> Source as a methodology for building languages.  Given that Open
> Source is orthogonal to Freedom (as you yourself point out), you'd
> have to be spoiling to pick an argument to read these comments as
> "trash[ing] the GNU project's work"!

It sounds to me like you're confusing "open source" (which both guile and
PLT scheme are, by virtue of their licenses) and the "bazaar style" of
development.  Eric Raymond has advocated both of these "causes" so strongly
that they have become identified with one another, but they are distinct.
Interestingly, the python language has an inner core of developers with
their own (closed) mailing list, and Eric Raymond is on that list.  So even
the staunchest "bazaar" advocate is implicitly admitting that
"cathedral-style" development works better for computer languages.  Now,
one could argue forever on whether a particular project is more-or-less
"bazaar-type" or "cathedral-type", but personally, I believe that computer
language projects need a strong central leadership.  OTOH gcc seems to be
doing quite well with a very "bazaar-type" development model, perhaps
because they aren't designing the language(s) themselves, only the
implementations. 

Mike