From: gwtmp01@...
Date: 2005-12-07T06:46:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Subclassing Class.


On Dec 6, 2005, at 1:43 PM, David A. Black wrote:
>> On Dec 6, 2005, at 11:19 AM, David A. Black wrote:
>>> This is different.  First of all, Ruby is a work by Matz, not any
>>> of us.
>>
>> With all due respect to Matz, I think Ruby is now much more than the
>> work of a single person.  Without a doubt, the community continues to
>> benefit from his leadership and there is no reason to think that that
>> won't continue but let's not pass over all the other contributors.
>
> Let's not pass over the sentence right after the one you quoted  
> either :-)

For the record, that next sentence was:
> But, granting that single authorship is not really the whole story  
> here,

Yeah, I should have acknowledged that in my response, but I didn't  
catch it
until after responding.  I still would have responded, but perhaps more
obliquely.

I think I missed 'part2' in first reading because of such a direct,
unambiguous statement just before it. I just don't know what to make of:
"Ruby is a work by Matz, not any of us" in the midst of a discussion of
language semantics.  That sounded too much like "proof by authority" for
my liking nor is that what I see going on in the Ruby community.

Now we are getting off topic.  Sorry for confusing your meaning.