On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 01:14:04AM -0500, Kenny Tilton wrote:
"Should Common-lisp.net host multiple projects with greatly overlapping objectives?"
I have zero problem with doing all this under one project (I'd just have
Heh. ;) That was actually a reference to multiple GUI-projects, as we already host Mario's lgtk (GTK for CL) project.
separate bundles/directories/whatever for Cells and Cello) and it might even be a lot more manageable that way until/if one or the other catches on. I can see myself over on a Cello list saying, "Oh, that's a Cells
...I really think they're stunting each other already. Take me for example: I'm definitely interested in Cells, but could not currently care less for Cello. ;)
One project, then? :)
As an admin: "Your choise."
As a lisper:
I haven't looked at the codebase, so I have no idea of the boundaries between them -- so this is rather theoretical. ;)
Cells is a "dataflow oriented extension" to Common Lisp, in a sence analogous to CLOS. I think that if the paradigm and ideas of Cells are universal enough, then Cells (or another implementation of that paradigm) has the potential (yes, I know this is unlikely) to become "another CLOS" on the long term.
Cello on the other hand seems to be at least three totally different projects rolled into one:
1) An experimental CLIM-like system based on Cells instead of CLOS.
2) A backend for the above, built on top of OpenGL.
3) OpenGL bindings for Common Lisp.
Now, *if* these perceptions are correct (I'm largely guessing here), then there really should be three projects if the CL community were to reap maximum benefit from all this:
Cells, Cello, cl-opengl
<half-serious> On a totally different topic: Erik, I'm getting the feeling that we're starting to have enough people on Common-lisp.net that it might make sense to start talk@common-lisp.net -- a mailing list equivalent of cll for people who certifiably are writing open CL stuff instead of just alking about it. </half-serious>
Cheers,
-- Nikodemus