From: vruz <horacio.lopez@...>
Date: 2005-03-04T02:44:05+09:00
Subject: Re: RAA Status & The Problem with Ruby

> I was never quite clear on how RPA was supposed to do this. Not to
> criticize the work of Mauricio and others, but it seemed to me to have
> a scaling problem: If you have a few volunteers trying to evaluate
> hundreds of Ruby libs, they're not going to have time to really
> evaluate them.

First of all, RPA was never intended to replace RAA.

RAA has been used as an important source of original, pristine
packages provided by developers.
As RPA encourages a number of  'Good Practices' , it is the aim that
developers have these general guidelines into account to make their
works more easily packageable for production use.

Ultimately,  if every developer out there loosely followed these
recommendations, (which we believe are a good balance between
simplicity, portability and scalability ie: 'packageability') in the
future, RPA would be becoming more like RAA, and RAA more like RPA. 
(but that doesn't mean RAA will cease to co-exist and evolve, RPA is
not trying to be THE standard)

What RPA is supposed to do can be read here:
http://rpa-base.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.cgi?RpaManifesto

The recommended Good Practices:
http://rpa-base.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.cgi?GoodPractices

Good API Design:
http://rpa-base.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.cgi?GoodAPIDesign

Packaging Nitpick Checklist:
http://rpa-base.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.cgi?PackagingNitpickChecklist

About the scaling problem, with respect to its developer base,  it has
the potential of being as scalable as any other open source project.

If you're talking about volunteers' turnaround efficiency, I
personally remember I found an undeclared dependency in Lafcadio,
understood the problem, reported it and it was fixed in the
corresponding RPA package within 24 hs. just to give an example.
I personally tested dozens of packages in at least 3 platforms.

If the scalability problem you see is in the number of volunteers or
the culture they're trying to foster, I'm sorry but I can't answer
that.

Do you know how volunteers have been consistently and actively
discouraged from joining the project ?
How do you think that could be fixed ?

Positive input is welcome.

> I'd like to see some sort of a website where Rubyists can sign on and
> then vouch for given libraries that they use from day to day. You'd be
> able to search for libs based on who else is using them--it'd be, at
> the least, a more automated way to find community opinion than emailing
> ruby-talk and asking "What do people use when they're trying to use
> Ruby with XYZ problem?"

Finally,  in your last statement,  I absolutely agree with you.

I'd greatly appreciate a more automated (politically unaware,
meritocratic) way to find unbiased information to learn about real
working and useful technology.

cheers,
                                vruz