From: anne001 Date: 2006-02-17T21:03:30+09:00 Subject: Re: Don't let this happen to Ruby, pleeeeease? I think the key of this text is that groovy had a big community making suggestions, but lacked leadership in terms of structure: exemple of problems: "The big problem of course was ambiguities - feature interactions could lead to very confusing errors" Suggestion for what was needed: "pair up James with someone who is good at writing specs" "It's time for someone to take leadership, produce a clear document showing a clear vision for Groovy, with a list of features that will be implemented and others that will be dropped. With a clear roadmap and precise deliverables that future users can judge Groovy by and decide whether it's a solid project they can rely on or just another aborted open-source project they can safely ignore....it takes a real "tech lead" to do this. Someone who understands the issues but also has a clear vision, sees the "big picture" and is not afraid to bark a few orders and do things himself if they don't get done." As far as I can tell, there has not been this kind of problems with Ruby. Ruby's center is fairly small and "unambiguous" and the growth has been lead by libraries based on the core. As James has said, the language has been around for years even in the US, so I think it is well past the "immaturity stage" talked about in the article.