[Inform] future
Sam Powell
blorb etc.. support). And when are we likely to see a next release?
--
==========================================================
ICQ: 11475858
Mail: sp...@globalnet.co.uk
Web: www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~spweb/
"OO is great, it is no coincidence that WOOHOO contains OO twice" - GLYPH
----BGCB----
Version: 3.1
GS/CS d(pu)- s-:+ a? C++++ LU+ P+ L+$/++ E+/++ W++/+++ N+++ o? K? w(---) !O
M(++)$ V? PS++ PE--(++) Y+ PGP+ t+++$ 5-- X+ R tv++ b+(-) DI? D++ G e>++++
h! r--(---) y*(--)
----EGCB----
IFC0.1--C- P- 2A4 --r+ i++
ka...@mousetrap.ml.org
: How could the next versions of Inform improve upon it? (apart from adding
: blorb etc.. support). And when are we likely to see a next release?
Well, as for blorb, inform knows nothing about it. That's all for the
interpreter to deal with.
And if we're putting up a wish list, I'd be happy to see a) dynamic memory
allocation, and b) better two (and even higher) dimensional arrays.
I know that (a) is going to be hard to do. I've heard that the distribution
of zasm comes with a version of malloc, so maybe that could be used, but I
know nothing about the details. (b) shouldn't be nearly so difficult. I like
the c-style array syntax, with array[width][height], etc. Much more
convientent than using the current syntax, which I must admit I don't fully
understand.
katre
Mary K. Kuhner
Sam Powell <sp...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>How could the next versions of Inform improve upon it? (apart from adding
>blorb etc.. support). And when are we likely to see a next release?
There are some small continuing annoyances: this would be my personal
list.
(1) ChooseObjects just doesn't work in some cases because the library
pre-empts it and doesn't let you choose the objects you want (I think
the problem case has to do with taking things from containers).
(2) If objectloop made a list of its targets and then looped over
them, rather than sometimes using "sibling()", we wouldn't see so many
posts about the "I sawed off the branch I was standing on" bug.
(3) It would be nice to be able to override the "room names are only
for 'you don't need to refer to that' messages" behavior without having
to add a whole parallel set of room names: this would make, for
example, "GO room_name" a lot easier to implement.
If you wanted to get much fancier, perhaps HTML-TADS indicates a
direction?
Inform 6 is quite nice, though. Things like the detailed handling of
plurals are a real improvement. I wouldn't be dismayed not to see
another version for a while, though of course if Graham is excited
by the prospect, more power to him!
Mary Kuhner mkku...@genetics.washington.edu
Matt Kimball
> And if we're putting up a wish list, I'd be happy to see a) dynamic memory
> allocation, and b) better two (and even higher) dimensional arrays.
> I know that (a) is going to be hard to do. I've heard that the distribution
> of zasm comes with a version of malloc, so maybe that could be used, but I
> know nothing about the details.
Yes, I wrote zasm as a sort of proof-of-concept that you could do
dynamic memory allocation in Z-machine programs, but it would be a
non-trivial task to get the malloc I wrote to work with Inform.
Still, if someone wanted to modify Inform to reserve a section of the
executable image as a dynamic memory heap, one could reimplement
malloc() and free() is Inform fairly easily.
--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com
Andrew Plotkin
> Yes, I wrote zasm as a sort of proof-of-concept that you could do
> dynamic memory allocation in Z-machine programs, but it would be a
> non-trivial task to get the malloc I wrote to work with Inform.
> Still, if someone wanted to modify Inform to reserve a section of the
> executable image as a dynamic memory heap, one could reimplement
> malloc() and free() is Inform fairly easily.
You can reserve up to 32K just by declaring a global array. That's how
Lists does it.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> Matt Kimball (mkim...@xmission.com) wrote:
>
> > Yes, I wrote zasm as a sort of proof-of-concept that you could do
> > dynamic memory allocation in Z-machine programs, but it would be a
> > non-trivial task to get the malloc I wrote to work with Inform.
> > Still, if someone wanted to modify Inform to reserve a section of the
> > executable image as a dynamic memory heap, one could reimplement
> > malloc() and free() is Inform fairly easily.
>
> You can reserve up to 32K just by declaring a global array. That's how
> Lists does it.
That 32K is the problem. Most of the reasons I can think of to want
dynamic memory allocation need hundreds of K to really be practical.
Maybe I'm just thinking too big, but *most* of the improvements I'd
like to see in Inform involve changes to the VM. I really think the
next version of Inform should wait for a new VM. (I can see some
updates to the library before that, but Inform itself... it really
needs the new VM to go much further, IMO.)
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> Inform 6 is quite nice, though. Things like the detailed handling of
> plurals are a real improvement. I wouldn't be dismayed not to see
> another version for a while, though of course if Graham is excited
> by the prospect, more power to him!
Like I said, I really think the next step is VM. RAM is starting to
get cheap. It's not free, but it's starting to get cheap, and I
think a VM with adjustable or at least much higher limits on
both static and dynamic memory would be a great boon. There
are other improvements that could be made over the current
z-machine, too (not the least of which would be adding the
features of z6 along with the increased limits on memory).
Say, where's Mark Howell when you need him?
;-)
- jonadab
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
"Sam Powell" <sp...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
> How could the next versions of Inform improve upon it? (apart from adding
> blorb etc.. support). And when are we likely to see a next release?
IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
I agree Inform needs upgrading now. Problems with Inform 6.15's Unicode
support and some minor nuisances in the 6/7 libraries are apparent. But the
question is - now that Graham appears to have abandoned Inform, who's going
to take it over?
If I had the experience with C, I would. However, Richard H. Poser II
mailto:who...@missingpiece.com is a likely candidate to take the compiler
over. The libraries are another matter. I may try to port WorldClass to
Inform, and thus start again on that front. But if anyone wants to try and
write 6/8, there's no reason why they should not.
Well?
Bye,
--
Stuart Moore.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Emerick Rogul
: IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
: I agree Inform needs upgrading now. Problems with Inform 6.15's Unicode
: support and some minor nuisances in the 6/7 libraries are apparent. But the
: question is - now that Graham appears to have abandoned Inform, who's going
: to take it over?
: If I had the experience with C, I would. However, Richard H. Poser II
: mailto:who...@missingpiece.com is a likely candidate to take the compiler
: over. The libraries are another matter. I may try to port WorldClass to
: Inform, and thus start again on that front. But if anyone wants to try and
: write 6/8, there's no reason why they should not.
Woah. Before we all start assuming that Graham's "abandoned" Inform,
why doesn't someone actually ask him? It seems very presumptuous to
just assume that he's given up on it and to start hacking a new
version. Personally, I don't think Graham's abandoned anything; other
areas of life may have called. Until he makes an official
pronouncement otherwise, I think this would be a very misguided idea.
-Emerick
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emerick Rogul /\/ "when i'm getting serious about a girl, i show
eme...@cs.bu.edu /\/ her 'rio bravo' and she better fucking like it."
------------------------------------------------------- quentin tarantino
Matt Kimball
> That 32K is the problem. Most of the reasons I can think of to want
> dynamic memory allocation need hundreds of K to really be practical.
Yes, I agree. Even with zasm, you're limited to about 64k. (Slightly
less than that actually. You need a header and an entry routine, so
you can't use the entire 64k RAM space).
> Maybe I'm just thinking too big, but *most* of the improvements I'd
> like to see in Inform involve changes to the VM. I really think the
> next version of Inform should wait for a new VM. (I can see some
> updates to the library before that, but Inform itself... it really
> needs the new VM to go much further, IMO.)
Yes, this would be very nice. Someone needs to design one first. You
wanna put up a spec for a new VM?
We've got all the pieces for a next-generation IF VM, except the
execution model. We've already got a resource file format (Blorb) and
an I/O subsystem (Glk).
--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com
Andrew Plotkin
> > Maybe I'm just thinking too big, but *most* of the improvements I'd
> > like to see in Inform involve changes to the VM. I really think the
> > next version of Inform should wait for a new VM. (I can see some
> > updates to the library before that, but Inform itself... it really
> > needs the new VM to go much further, IMO.)
> Yes, this would be very nice. Someone needs to design one first. You
> wanna put up a spec for a new VM?
> We've got all the pieces for a next-generation IF VM, except the
> execution model. We've already got a resource file format (Blorb) and
> an I/O subsystem (Glk).
I have made a few cuts at this subject -- long ago, before I focussed on
Glk.
My conclusion is that the hard part is the compiler. The VM by itself is a
very simple thing.
Arcum Dagsson
(Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
> stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> > IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
>
> We've been over this before. A few months between updates of such
> a stable thing as Inform 6 does not indicate abandonment.
>
>
> - jonadab
If you really want to know, why not ask him? For reference, Grahams e-mail
is gra...@gnelson.demon.co.uk, or you could probably track him down in
rec.arts.drwho ...
--Arcum Dagsson
Would anyone like any toast?
Neil K.
Such lack of faith. Graham has abandoned the land of Inform, cry the
prophets of doom, and after only a few months without updates.
Allow me to relate a fable to you.
For many years the land of TADS benefitted from a veritable bounty of
regular updates from Mike Roberts. People came to its rich and fertile
valleys, and they tilled the soil of the land of TADS, bringing forth a
multitude of games. The ranks of the people were swelled by refugees from
the abandoned cities of AGT and AdvSys. Many fruitful years of development
passed. But surely as day must turn to night, Mike came to be tired of his
labours. And a heavy silence befell the land.
And lo, despair struck the people. "What have we done?" they cried. "No
updates have come forth from the towers of Palo Alto! Are we unworthy?
Surely, we are doomed!" They rent their garments, wailed to the heavens,
and the great halls of raif echoed with their grief.
It was a time of great darkness. Many of the people, fearing that the
land of TADS was indeed lost, made the perilous journey across barren
deserts to the land of Inform where, it was said, Graham Nelson issued
forth bountiful updates from the high courts of Oxford.
But as surely as night must turn day, Mike rose again from his slumber.
The remaining faithful gazed in wonder and awe as a new sun rose over the
cold, wintry land - the sun of HTML. And lo, there was great celebration.
MIDI files! Digitized WAVs! Lossy and non-lossy graphics! The golden skull
was brought forth from its cave, and the fatted chicken slaughtered. And
thus it came to pass that the faithful found their unflagging devotion
rewarded.
Or something.
- Neil K.
--
t e l a computer consulting + design * Vancouver, BC, Canada
web: http://www.tela.bc.ca/tela/ * email: tela @ tela.bc.ca
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> > We've got all the pieces for a next-generation IF VM, except the
> > execution model. We've already got a resource file format (Blorb) and
> > an I/O subsystem (Glk).
>
> I have made a few cuts at this subject -- long ago, before I focussed on
> Glk.
>
> My conclusion is that the hard part is the compiler. The VM by itself is a
> very simple thing.
I would assume that the hard part of the VM would be the interpreter,
because building as we are with knowledge of the strong and weak
points of the z-machine, the spec itself shouldn't be that tough --
except for one thing. There is no one person in charge of it.
So if there are any disagreements about anything, nobody knows
how to resolve them. Of course, if one person would volunteer to
take charge of the spec, assuming it were a person we all can agree
is reasonably competent, I can imagine most of us would be willing to
settle on that. The problem is finding such a volunteer.
And then we still need a volunteer to write a portable interpreter
for it, as well as a version of Inform for it -- which requires
Graham Nelson's permission whether he's the volunteer or not,
although in any case I doubt whether there are very many people
who are up to writing a new version of Inform, and it would probably
be best if Graham Nelson would agree to do it. But even if someone
else were to volunteer to do it, we still need the new VM first.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
Andrew Plotkin
> > My conclusion is that the hard part is the compiler. The VM by itself is a
> > very simple thing.
> I would assume that the hard part of the VM would be the interpreter,
No, that's pretty easy too. Look how simple the non-I/O parts of ZIP are.
> because building as we are with knowledge of the strong and weak
> points of the z-machine, the spec itself shouldn't be that tough --
> except for one thing. There is no one person in charge of it.
In charge of what? There isn't a VM project in progress to be in charge
of.
We're batting around ideas, but we batted around ideas four months ago,
and a year ago, and etc.
I'm not completely convinced that this is the right time to start such a
Doeadeer3
In article <fake-mail-121...@rich-53-0101.direct.ca>,
fake...@anti-spam.address (Neil K.) writes:
>Or something.
>
> - Neil K.
Nice, reminds me of my Dedicated to Volker thread (but much, much better, hmmm,
I may plagiarize you, substitue some of my words with yours, if I ever do an IF
web page again).
So when Graham descends from the lofty towers of Oxford, floating down on a
demi-god (or sex symbol of the millenium) cloud, we should kill a fatted grue?
Well, that seems fair... if a bit gr... nyah I won't say it.
Cute post. Very good point.
Doe :-)
Doe doea...@aol.com (formerly known as FemaleDeer)
****************************************************************************
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
Emerick Rogul <eme...@csa.bu.edu> wrote:
> stuart moore writes:
>
> : IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
>
> : I agree Inform needs upgrading now. Problems with Inform 6.15's Unicode
> : support and some minor nuisances in the 6/7 libraries are apparent. But the
> : question is - now that Graham appears to have abandoned Inform, who's going
> : to take it over?
>
> : If I had the experience with C, I would. However, Richard H. Poser II
> : mailto:who...@missingpiece.com is a likely candidate to take the compiler
> : over. The libraries are another matter. I may try to port WorldClass to
> : Inform, and thus start again on that front. But if anyone wants to try and
> : write 6/8, there's no reason why they should not.
>
> Woah. Before we all start assuming that Graham's "abandoned" Inform,
> why doesn't someone actually ask him? It seems very presumptuous to
> just assume that he's given up on it and to start hacking a new
> version. Personally, I don't think Graham's abandoned anything; other
> areas of life may have called. Until he makes an official
> pronouncement otherwise, I think this would be a very misguided idea.
<Sigh> Well, I said "appears to have". I believe Graham has abandoned Inform
(and the IF scene as a whole), but this does NOT mean he has. I would be
pleased to be proven wrong, Emerick. Just his 100% silence IF-wise makes me
think he has abandoned the IF scene as completely as C.E. Forman did (who
deleted everything IF-related from his machine, and hasn't played any IF in
months and isn't like to ever again either).
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
fake...@anti-spam.address (Neil K.) wrote:
>
> Such lack of faith. Graham has abandoned the land of Inform, cry the
> prophets of doom, and after only a few months without updates.
I wouldn't call over a year "a few months", Neil. Inform has not been updated
compiler wise since September last year (14 months ago). The libraries since
March - 8 months ago. I merely comment upon available facts. And these two
facts suggest that Graham Nelson has not just abandoned Inform, but IF as a
whole. I hope I am wrong, but it doesn't look that way.
> Allow me to relate a fable to you.
Do so.
> For many years the land of TADS benefitted from a veritable bounty of
> regular updates from Mike Roberts. People came to its rich and fertile
> valleys, and they tilled the soil of the land of TADS, bringing forth a
> multitude of games. The ranks of the people were swelled by refugees from
> the abandoned cities of AGT and AdvSys. Many fruitful years of development
> passed. But surely as day must turn to night, Mike came to be tired of his
> labours. And a heavy silence befell the land.
For how long? And was Mike as >completely< non-responsive towards IF matters
as Graham is being now? I know Graham's still posting - rec.arts.drwho is
where he is at.
> And lo, despair struck the people. "What have we done?" they cried. "No
> updates have come forth from the towers of Palo Alto! Are we unworthy?
> Surely, we are doomed!" They rent their garments, wailed to the heavens,
> and the great halls of raif echoed with their grief.
Cry-babies. Take TADS' development up themselves, they should have.
> It was a time of great darkness. Many of the people, fearing that the
> land of TADS was indeed lost, made the perilous journey across barren
> deserts to the land of Inform where, it was said, Graham Nelson issued
> forth bountiful updates from the high courts of Oxford.
Now the reverse appears to be true.
> But as surely as night must turn day, Mike rose again from his slumber.
> The remaining faithful gazed in wonder and awe as a new sun rose over the
> cold, wintry land - the sun of HTML. And lo, there was great celebration.
> MIDI files! Digitized WAVs! Lossy and non-lossy graphics! The golden skull
> was brought forth from its cave, and the fatted chicken slaughtered. And
> thus it came to pass that the faithful found their unflagging devotion
> rewarded.
HOW LONG AFTER HE HAD ORIGINALLY SAID HE WAS NO LONGER DEVELOPING TADS, NEIL?
AND, UNLIKE GRAHAM, AT LEAST HE >MADE< A FUCKING ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT IT'S
FUTURE.
At least Graham could have the decency to SAY he was not developing Inform
for a period of time.
> Or something.
Maybe.
Note this is being e-mailed to Graham too, *u**-word and all. And I never
swear unless I am VERY angry about something.
I am going to switch to Hugo or TADS once all my Inform projects are done.
At least they tend to be more responsive than Graham's proven to be so far.
If Graham's not abandoned Inform, then he should have the guts to say so.
Inform's more than a little good. It's more versatile than TADS, and more
mature library-wise than Hugo. But it can't be allowed to fall behind.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
jon...@zerospam.com (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
> stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> a stable thing as Inform 6 does not indicate abandonment.
Damn it! 14 months is more than a few!
IT HASN'T BEEN UPDATED FOR OVER A YEAR NOW!!!
Inform may be stable, but that doesn't mean it's beyond improvement.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
<Arcum_Dagsson-1...@ip95.las-vegas4.nevada.pub-ip.psi.net>,
Arcum_...@green.eggs.and.spam.at.hotmail.dot.com (Arcum Dagsson) wrote:
> In article <364b69ae...@news.bright.net>, jon...@zerospam.com
> (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
>
> > stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > > IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
> >
> > We've been over this before. A few months between updates of such
> > a stable thing as Inform 6 does not indicate abandonment.
> >
> >
>
> If you really want to know, why not ask him? For reference, Grahams e-mail
> is gra...@gnelson.demon.co.uk, or you could probably track him down in
> rec.arts.drwho ...
Have already done so, to no result.
Den of Iniquity
>Note this is being e-mailed to Graham too, *u**-word and all. And I never
>swear unless I am VERY angry about something.
>I am going to switch to Hugo or TADS once all my Inform projects are done.
>At least they tend to be more responsive than Graham's proven to be so far.
I think we missed a form of trolling from the list...
4) Trolling for Graham - unique to the r.a.i-f group.
In the face of this onslaught, if I were Graham, I'd keep my mouth shut.
But then I always was the ornery type.
--
Den
Matt Kimball
> There is no one person in charge of it. So if there are any
> disagreements about anything, nobody knows how to resolve them.
Someone can write up a spec. If it is any good, other people will
decide to use it. If it isn't any good, other people won't use it.
The person who wrote the spec can change it. Other people can suggest
changes.
If someone thinks a change should be made, and the spec author won't
make the change, then they can write their own spec.
I don't think there is a problem.
> And then we still need a volunteer to write a portable interpreter
> for it, as well as a version of Inform for it -- which requires
> Graham Nelson's permission whether he's the volunteer or not,
> although in any case I doubt whether there are very many people
> who are up to writing a new version of Inform, and it would probably
> be best if Graham Nelson would agree to do it. But even if someone
> else were to volunteer to do it, we still need the new VM first.
Are you sure Graham's permission is needed? I haven't looked at the
Inform license lately, so perhaps it is necessary. In any case,
someone could always write a compiler from Inform to this entirely
theoretical VM, without using any of Graham's code.
Yes, we do need a VM first.
--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com
LucFrench
>
>4) Trolling for Graham - unique to the r.a.i-f group.
Actually, I did mention it, but didn't give it a letter due to the fact that it
wasn't sufficiently general.
Thanks
Luc "Search for Extraterestial Intelegent Maintainers" French
Matthew T. Russotto
Matt Kimball <mkim...@xmission.com> wrote:
}Are you sure Graham's permission is needed? I haven't looked at the
}Inform license lately, so perhaps it is necessary. In any case,
}someone could always write a compiler from Inform to this entirely
}theoretical VM, without using any of Graham's code.
The library becomes your biggest problem, then. Some of it is heavily
dependant on Z-machine specifics.
}Yes, we do need a VM first.
I suggest the 68020 processor. It's 32 bits, widely emulated and certainly
general enough. And we can add 68881 floating point if necessary. :-^)
--
Matthew T. Russotto russ...@pond.com
"Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit
of justice is no virtue."
Emerick Rogul
: Damn it! 14 months is more than a few!
: IT HASN'T BEEN UPDATED FOR OVER A YEAR NOW!!!
Let's try not to take this discussion to an infantile level, please.
Graham released the most recent version of Inform (6.15 - a maintenance
release), on March 23rd, 1998. That was eight months ago, by my
reckoning; not a year, and not fourteen months, no matter how many
capital letters and exclamation points you use. Let's have a little
bit of faith, people.
: Inform may be stable, but that doesn't mean it's beyond improvement.
And, Graham may not currently have the time to improve Inform, but
that doesn't mean he's abandoned it.
-Emerick
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"i am a lost soul, i shoot myself with rock and roll,
the hole i dig is bottomless, but nothing else can set me free."
--- Emerick Rogul <eme...@cs.bu.edu> --------- 'i am a scientist', gbv
L. Ross Raszewski
stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <364b69ae...@news.bright.net>,
> jon...@zerospam.com (Jonadab the Unsightly One) wrote:
> > stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> >
> > > IF there is a next version of Inform. I believe Graham's abandoned it.
> >
> > We've been over this before. A few months between updates of such
> > a stable thing as Inform 6 does not indicate abandonment.
>
>
> IT HASN'T BEEN UPDATED FOR OVER A YEAR NOW!!!
>
>
>
> --
> Stuart Moore.
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
It is not graham's job to implement new features and improvements. it's his
job (if the term even really applies) to fix bugs and upgrade the compiler.
If the compiler works as well as he wants it to, and the libraries do the
minimumm whi\ch is needed to write an adventure game, then what's the hurry?
Not to mention that graham is probably waiting for someone to come to a
decision about the new VM (personally, I don't think we need one yet, but the
number of people that think we do is growing quickly) before he plows any
more time into rewriting a Z-machine-based inform.
Now, I've had just about enough of you telling people htat graham has given
up on inform, or trying to offer it to other people. until graham nelson says
that he's given up n it, he HASNT (for what it's worth, I haven't updated
hints.h in a year and change. I haven't given up on it.
Neil K.
Sigh. Okay, against my better judgement here I am getting into this
again. I'm also going to assume, probably naively, that you're serious and
not being a total troll.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> For how long? And was Mike as >completely< non-responsive towards IF matters
> as Graham is being now? I know Graham's still posting - rec.arts.drwho is
> where he is at.
Mike Roberts pulled back from the IF world for a good couple years, as I
recall. As is his right. I know I've burned out on various projects over
time, and it can be very hard to want to deal with them during that
burnt-out point.
As for Graham posting to a Dr. Who newsgroup - so what? He's got his life
and he's welcome to spend his time however he wishes. You sound rather
petulant, you know.
> Cry-babies. Take TADS' development up themselves, they should have.
No they shouldn't have. TADS is Mike Roberts' copyrighted property, and
the licence agreement does not say "do with it as you will." Besides, it's
a moot point. Back in those days the source code to TADS was not publicly
available - only Mike had a copy.
The same licensing restrictions apply to Inform, incidentally. If you
were to read the Designer's Manual you'd notice that not only is Inform
Graham's copyrighted property, but that "distributed copies [can not be]
substantially different from those archived by the author."
Now if you want to argue that Mike and Graham should have GPL'd the
source or made it totally public domain or whatever, fine. But they chose
not to, as is their right.
> HOW LONG AFTER HE HAD ORIGINALLY SAID HE WAS NO LONGER DEVELOPING TADS, NEIL?
> AND, UNLIKE GRAHAM, AT LEAST HE >MADE< A FUCKING ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT IT'S
> FUTURE.
Mike Roberts never once said he was no longer developing TADS, Mr.
Shouty. And he chose to make a fucking announcement about future
directions with TADS only after a quiet period of a year or two. (And
another year and a half elapsed before HTML TADS first appeared.) I don't
know why he didn't say anything during that time, but I can guess -
deciding what to do with the development of a system as big as TADS or
Inform is a very large time commitment and not a decision to be taken
lightly.
> Note this is being e-mailed to Graham too, *u**-word and all. And I never
> swear unless I am VERY angry about something.
Are you deliberately trying to be a jerk here, or do you really have this
bizarre idea that Graham owes you something?
Graham with Inform, like Mike with TADS and Kent with Hugo, chose to
produce a piece of work and let other people use it freely. He owes you
nothing. You, at the very least, owe him a modicum of civility.
Now I realize as much as anyone how frustrating it can be if the author
of your language of choice chooses not to update the software as often as
you'd like. But that's life. No money exchanged hands; no contractual
obligations were signed. You're building your work on the good will of
another. If it bothers you that your project is tied to the work of
someone else like this, then create your own system.
And stop being a crybaby.
- Neil K.
PS: though I might add that it has been Graham's modus operandi in the
past to work quietly on a major new project, then release it without any
warning.
Adam J. Thornton
<stuart...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>HOW LONG AFTER HE HAD ORIGINALLY SAID HE WAS NO LONGER DEVELOPING TADS, NEIL?
>AND, UNLIKE GRAHAM, AT LEAST HE >MADE< A FUCKING ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT IT'S
>FUTURE.
>
>for a period of time.
Look, asswipe.
Graham owes you *NOTHING*.
Get that straight.
He wrote Inform. It's *HIS* code. He does what he wants with it. And he
does not owe you, or me, or any of us any updates. And to accuse him of
indecency because he's doing other things with his life makes me wish I
could reach through the 'net and smack you upside your whiny little
pinhead.
Adam
--
ad...@princeton.edu
"There's a border to somewhere waiting, and a tank full of time." - J. Steinman
TenthStone
> Sigh. Okay, against my better judgement here I am getting into this
>again. I'm also going to assume, probably naively, that you're serious and
>not being a total troll.
The chief problem with trolls is that there is an underlying psychological
condition (a desire for attention, for the most part, which applies to
those with sadistic intentions as well) which the troller may have no idea
about.
Sometimes I wonder if I suffer from it. I console myself with the fact
that I rarely post anything inflammatory, so even if I do fall under the
category, at least I'm not doing anyone any harm.
> stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> HOW LONG AFTER HE HAD ORIGINALLY SAID HE WAS NO LONGER DEVELOPING TADS, NEIL?
>> AND, UNLIKE GRAHAM, AT LEAST HE >MADE< A FUCKING ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT IT'S
>> FUTURE.
>
> Mike Roberts never once said he was no longer developing TADS, Mr.
>Shouty. And he chose to make a fucking announcement about future
>directions with TADS only after a quiet period of a year or two. (And
>another year and a half elapsed before HTML TADS first appeared.) I don't
>know why he didn't say anything during that time, but I can guess -
>deciding what to do with the development of a system as big as TADS or
>Inform is a very large time commitment and not a decision to be taken
>lightly.
Incidentally, this fucking announcement can be found at:
http://x6.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=161225945
-----------
The imperturbable TenthStone
tenth...@hotmail.com mcc...@erols.com mcc...@gsgis.k12.va.us
Doeadeer3
In article <fake-mail-131...@209.17.154.121>, fake...@nospam.ca
(Neil K.) writes:
> Mike Roberts pulled back from the IF world for a good couple years, as I
>recall. As is his right. I know I've burned out on various projects over
>time, and it can be very hard to want to deal with them during that
>burnt-out point.
I agree wholeheartedly with that statement and if Graham is experiencing the
same thing (which we don't know, but might assume he is, with no other input to
the contrary) ranting and raving at him will only increase his desire to stay
away.
Mr. Nelson put a lot of time and effort into Inform. Because of that he is
allowed a break and because of that, I suspect it is only a break. I would be
very surprised if he just dropped it without first giving it a lot of thought
(making an announcement he was dropping it and maybe choosing someone else to
maintain the library). Actually, I would be very surprised if he just dropped
it forever and ever, period.
So bear with...
Doe :-) Other than a few minor bugs in the library, Inform works just fine as
it is.
LucFrench
>past to work quietly on a major new project, then release it without any
>warning.
Which, I might add, is the path of sorrow.
You know not if the DevTeam is dead, or just off developing.
There are two reasons why some people dispise NetHack (me included); that's one
of them.
(The other is the YASD factor is just a bit too high; I don't like if a
character is killed without warning. It's called Game Balance, people. You're
supposed to have some!)
NetHack can't gather any more steam, at present. It needs a more open, active
development effort. (Even ADOM, which is blantently closed source, is more
responsive to suggestions and bug reports then NH.)
Thanks
Luc "Trolling for in-jokes" French
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> PS: though I might add that it has been Graham's modus operandi in the
> past to work quietly on a major new project, then release it without any
> warning.
I didn't know that. That's very encouraging.
Given his past accomplishments, what would a "major new project" be
at this point? I'd better stop thinking about that right this
minute. I'd never sleep tonight with that kind of exciting idea
blowing around between mine ears.
"Girls are so weird."
-- Calvin
Joyce Haslam
September - he reminded us then of the difference between lurking and
sulking.
Joyce.
--
Joyce Haslam
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/dljhaslam/ for Gateway to Karos [INFORM]
Powerbase is for RiscOs only
c o m u s @ a r g o n e t . c o . u k
Ricardo Dague
In one of his radw posts, he mentioned it was 'Dr.' now.
Maybe that means he's too busy for time-consuming side
projects?
-- Ricardo
"You never see a frog so modest and straightfor'ard as he
ws, for all he was so gifted." -- Mark Twain, "The
celebrated Jumping Frog..."
David Glasser
> PS: though I might add that it has been Graham's modus operandi in the
> past to work quietly on a major new project, then release it without any
> warning.
He's probably out there laughing at us right now for not noticing that
one of the Comp98 entries was his.
--
David Glasser gla...@NOSPAMuscom.com http://onramp.uscom.com/~glasser
PS: Oh, and I'm not trying to imply that I know this for a fact. Just a
guess.
DGlasser @ ifMUD : fovea.retina.net 4000 (webpage fovea.retina.net:4001)
Sadie Hawkins, official band of David Glasser: http://sadie.retina.net
"We take our icons very seriously in this class."
Doeadeer3
In article <364ccb1f...@news.bright.net>, jon...@zerospam.com (Jonadab
the Unsightly One) writes:
>> PS: though I might add that it has been Graham's modus operandi in the
>> past to work quietly on a major new project, then release it without any
>> warning.
>
>I didn't know that. That's very encouraging.
I did know that, it is what no one has quite been mentioning, except Neil, just
now.
>Given his past accomplishments, what would a "major new project" be
>at this point? I'd better stop thinking about that right this
>minute. I'd never sleep tonight with that kind of exciting idea
>blowing around between mine ears.
Have done that too. OO library? New VM? Inform HTML? A new game? However, that
could be wishful thinking on Mr. Nelson's fans' parts. He could just be burned
out and taking a break. We can't know. We won't know until he says something,
so if he hasn't been hiding away creating something new, don't be disappointed.
Just having him back someday would be very nice, IMHO.
Doe :-)
R. Alan Monroe
>> Woah. Before we all start assuming that Graham's "abandoned" Inform,
>> why doesn't someone actually ask him? It seems very presumptuous to
>> just assume that he's given up on it and to start hacking a new
>> version. Personally, I don't think Graham's abandoned anything; other
>> areas of life may have called. Until he makes an official
>> pronouncement otherwise, I think this would be a very misguided idea.
><Sigh> Well, I said "appears to have". I believe Graham has abandoned Inform
>(and the IF scene as a whole), but this does NOT mean he has. I would be
>pleased to be proven wrong, Emerick. Just his 100% silence IF-wise makes me
>think he has abandoned the IF scene as completely
The nature of this entire thread makes me wonder if many people
in the world have been "spoiled" in both a good, and a bad sense,
by companies who in recent years have begun releasing buggy
or incomplete software and then pouring forth an endless stream
of so-called updates, patches, etc. I'm theorizing out loud that this
has permanently bent many people's (not people in this newsgroup
but people all over the world) expectations measurably.
Delurking
Alan
Joe Mason
>> Mr. Nelson . . .
>
>In one of his radw posts, he mentioned it was 'Dr.' now.
>Maybe that means he's too busy for time-consuming side
>projects?
Really? Congratulation, Dr. Nelson!
I have faith that he'll read this. Just like last time.
Joe
--
I think OO is great... It's no coincidence that "woohoo" contains "oo" twice.
-- GLYPH
J. Kerr
>Ricardo Dague <tri...@hotmail.com> wrote (not insribed, ok? wrote):
>>> Mr. Nelson . . .
>>
>>In one of his radw posts, he mentioned it was 'Dr.' now.
>>Maybe that means he's too busy for time-consuming side
>>projects?
>Really? Congratulation, Dr. Nelson!
>I have faith that he'll read this. Just like last time.
You're a bit behind the times. Graham completed his doctorate in the
differential geometry of 3-manifolds in 1996 ;-)
Jane
okbl...@usa.net
amo...@zoomnet.net (R. Alan Monroe) wrote:
>
> The nature of this entire thread makes me wonder if many people
> in the world have been "spoiled" in both a good, and a bad sense,
> by companies who in recent years have begun releasing buggy
> or incomplete software and then pouring forth an endless stream
> of so-called updates, patches, etc. I'm theorizing out loud that this
> has permanently bent many people's (not people in this newsgroup
> but people all over the world) expectations measurably.
>
And I'd like to take this opportunity to blame it on Microsoft.<g>
The bugs fly so fast and furious on the Windows platform--and MS releases new
bugs at a lightning fast rate under the guise of "new standards"--that the
90%+ of the world that uses MS products expects to: a) find a lot of bugs; b)
have to reboot a lot; c) be in a continual state of upgrading.
It has been speculated that the reason IBM was so eager to drop OS/2 and even
now (while their 200 largest customers =depend= on it) will not promote it to
the general public, is because *every* bug report gets assigned and tracked
down--and that's just too expensive for a low-cost mass-market item.
[ok]
nob...@student.anu.edu.au
> Sam Powell <sp...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
> There are some small continuing annoyances: this would be my personal
> list.
>
> (1) ChooseObjects just doesn't work in some cases because the library
> pre-empts it and doesn't let you choose the objects you want (I think
> the problem case has to do with taking things from containers).
One killer case is the difficulty in overriding the held token - I'd
prefer to see something like an implicit_take() function being called ...
so that one
could easily do something like
> DRINK COLA
(from the can)
(taking the can first)
You drink the cola. Mmm ... caffeine.
> DRINK WATER
(from the fountain)
You take a sip of water from the fountain. Refreshing.
Have been giving serious thought to removing all references to the held
token and doing parsing calls of implicits from the verb ...
> (2) If objectloop made a list of its targets and then looped over
> them, rather than sometimes using "sibling()", we wouldn't see so many
> posts about the "I sawed off the branch I was standing on" bug.
Doesn't even need to do that - just store the sibling at the very beginning.
* I'd like to see possessives handled properly - having "john's" as a name
for an object is a kludge.
* I'd like to see inventory fixed in the library to handle concealed .. so that
the nose example can be done properly as a possessed object without the
need for overriding =).
urrrm .. probably other things, but these are the immediate pains.
--OH.
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> And I'd like to take this opportunity to blame it on Microsoft.<g>
>
> The bugs fly so fast and furious on the Windows platform--and MS releases new
> bugs at a lightning fast rate under the guise of "new standards"--that the
> 90%+ of the world that uses MS products expects to: a) find a lot of bugs; b)
> have to reboot a lot; c) be in a continual state of upgrading.
The solution, of course, is for everyone (except the Unix people)
to upgrade to PC-DOS 3.3, the last stable OS for the PC that
was designed for JAWDKAAU (Joe Average Who Doesn't Know
Anything About Unix.)
HTH.HAND.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> could be wishful thinking on Mr. Nelson's fans' parts. He could just be burned
> out and taking a break. We can't know. We won't know until he says something,
> so if he hasn't been hiding away creating something new, don't be disappointed.
That's why I don't want to dwell on the possibilities of what he
might be up to if, indeed, he were up to something. My imagination
is rather like... I'm not sure, but anyway it runs away with me a
lot. I'd be sure to dream up something AI-complete and wish
for it with all my might or something. Then I would be disappointed.
So I'll just tell myself what I've been assuming all along, which
is that he must just be taking a break and may be undecided
as to whether (and if so when) to come back to IF.
> Just having him back someday would be very nice, IMHO.
Well, yeah.
I bet there's one more game in his head, or some
sage advice at the very least.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> Don't forget that Graham Nelson was posting to this very group in
> September - he reminded us then of the difference between lurking and
> sulking.
>
> Joyce.
In fact I hadn't forgotten, but I didn't want to mention it for fear
of "oh, maybe he's listening" syndrome.
Maybe he is. Personally I suspect that he's at most skimming
the subject lines for "interesting" stuff for the time being. But
that's only a guess.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> He's probably out there laughing at us right now for not noticing that
> one of the Comp98 entries was his.
Quick, start rearranging letters...
- jonadab
Lucian Paul Smith
: One killer case is the difficulty in overriding the held token - I'd
: prefer to see something like an implicit_take() function being called ...
: so that one
: could easily do something like
: > DRINK COLA
: (from the can)
: (taking the can first)
: You drink the cola. Mmm ... caffeine.
There's a way to do this. Kenneth Fair had this problem with 'Take', and
came up with a solution which he posted:
http://x13.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=279585432
You'll also probably want to see Zarf's response, which neatens Ken's
solution a bit:
http://x13.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=280233698
-Lucian
Magnus Olsson
Ricardo Dague <tri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Mr. Nelson . . .
>
>In one of his radw posts, he mentioned it was 'Dr.' now.
>Maybe that means he's too busy for time-consuming side
>projects?
I think it's been "Dr" for several years now, and that he got his
doctorate at least before doing the major rewrite from Inform 5 to
Inform 6, and quite possibly earlier than that.
And to those getting frustrated over Graham's silence: Graham
apparently receives a *lot* of mail about Inform and his games, and
sometimes - even during his "active" bug-fixing periods - takes a long
time answering it.
And Graham has been silent for long periods before. I think it's far
too early to jump to the conclusion that he's "abandoned" Inform
permanently. (And comparing him to C.E. Forman, who threw a few nasty
tantrums because his games didn't get the attention they deserved, and
then left in a huff, is IMHO ludicrous).
I don't think getting abusive won't help - Graham doesn't seem to be
the kind of person who can be provoked into making statements just by
yelling at him.
And, finally: even if Graham *had* no intention of ever working on
Inform again (horrible thought!), we're *not* free to start modifying
the Inform compiler at will, for copyright reasons. We could of
course, as somebody pointed out, write an entirely new compiler for
the Inform language, but doing so without Graham's cooperation would
be rather a waste of time.
If you don't like the current state of things, you're of course free
to switch to another development system - but be aware that similar
things may happen to them.
--
Magnus Olsson (m...@df.lth.se, zeb...@pobox.com)
------ http://www.pobox.com/~zebulon ------
Magnus Olsson
(...)
>I don't think getting abusive won't help
Oops, sorry , of course I meant the exact opposite: I most
empathically *do* think getting abusive at Graham won't help.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
As you may be able to tell, I am rather annoyed at the Inform situation.
I am annoyed that Graham Nelson just seemed to stop developing Inform without
any warning. If Graham Nelson had made an announcement to that effect, fine.
The fact that Inform hasn't been updated for 14 months, that Graham Nelson is
being non-responsive, and that no announcement about Inform's future has
allowed a flame-inducing thread like "[Inform] future" to begin, really
annoys me.
At least Mike Roberts had the decency to announce he was discontinuing TADS
development. No such announcement was forthcoming from Graham Nelson. His
website has not been updated, Inform-wise, for eight months now (since
libraries 6/7 came out, in fact).
I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
expect to behave better.
I am going to ignore this thread from now on. My response was anger. Not at
you, but at Graham Nelson. Inform's users deserve better. It could, however,
have been better expressed.
The facts as available indicate that Graham Nelson has discontinued
development of Inform, and has declined to tell others this fact. Therefore,
the outlook for Inform is bleak, unless Graham Nelson decides to indicate to
the contrary. Current evidence suggests that this will be unlikely.
Mister Forman told me that he deleted everything IF-related - games,
interpreters, source code, everything - from his PC. Is it not possible that
Graham Nelson has done the same, and completely withdrawn from the IF scene?
What I know of the TADS situation is that Mike Roberts had announced that he
was discontinuing developing TADS, then some time later announced that he had
decided to once more develop TADS. This is not analogous to the Inform
situation.
As far as the Hugo situation goes, Kent Tessman has told me that the next
version of Hugo may be some time off, as he's on the road at present.
Of the "big three", the only system to have not been updated is Inform.
This is not acceptable.
Bye,
--
Stuart Moore.
Mark J Musante
> As you may be able to tell, I am rather annoyed at the Inform situation.
How bloody arrogant. What gives you the RIGHT to be annoyed? In what way
have you contributed to Graham's work in Inform? Have you, in fact, co-
written the compiler without anyone having mentioned this? Or, perhaps,
you wrote the libraries without us noticing?
Graham wrote Inform, the manuals, and the libraries all in his spare time.
This is not his primary job. If he chooses to take a breather for 8 months
or 14 months or 5 years, that's his right. And he owes us nothing.
> Mister Forman told me that he deleted everything IF-related - games,
> interpreters, source code, everything - from his PC. Is it not possible that
> Graham Nelson has done the same, and completely withdrawn from the IF scene?
No, it is not possible he has done the same. Did you even bother to check
his web site before posting this?
> I am going to ignore this thread from now on.
Oh you are, are you? You are either trying to start an row or you are being
narrow-minded and selfish. In either case, I should never have written this;
but I did because *I'm* being selfish too. Graham certainly doesn't need me
sticking up for him.
-=- Mark -=-
Magnus Olsson
<Stuart...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>As you may be able to tell, I am rather annoyed at the Inform situation.
Well, I can understand that you're frustrated. You have my sympathies.
However...
>I am annoyed that Graham Nelson just seemed to stop developing Inform without
>any warning....
(...)
>I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
>expect to behave better.
(...)
>Of the "big three", the only system to have not been updated is Inform.
>
>This is not acceptable.
Repeat after me:
Graham Nelson does not owe you, or any other Inform user, anything.
Graham Nelson is under no obligation to develop or support Inform in
the future.
Graham Nelson is not doing this as a professional, but as an amateur
(in the original sense of the word) and is under no obligation to
behave "professionally", whatever that may mean.
Proclaiming that Graham has "abandoned" Inform and starting a
discussion about who should take over development is extremely rude,
considering that Inform remains Graham's intellectual property. (On
the other hand, asking Graham whether he intends to continue
supporting it or if somebody else should take over is appropriate, if
done in a polite way, but it's Graham's prerogative not to answer).
That said, I think everybody finds Graham's silence frustrating, but I
really don't think being abusive will make him less reluctant to post.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
olo...@world.std.com (Mark J Musante) wrote:
> stuart...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > As you may be able to tell, I am rather annoyed at the Inform situation.
>
> have you contributed to Graham's work in Inform? Have you, in fact, co-
> written the compiler without anyone having mentioned this? Or, perhaps,
> you wrote the libraries without us noticing?
It's rather stupid of you to say I've done anything with Graham on Inform. I
have not and I never said I did. So please do not accuse of me saying things
that I have not, and never would without justification.
> Graham wrote Inform, the manuals, and the libraries all in his spare time.
> This is not his primary job. If he chooses to take a breather for 8 months
> or 14 months or 5 years, that's his right. And he owes us nothing.
I accept this. I never said he OWES anyone anything. I said it WOULD HAVE BEEN
NICE if he could have made some kind of announcement about Inform's future.
> > Mister Forman told me that he deleted everything IF-related - games,
> > interpreters, source code, everything - from his PC. Is it not possible that
> > Graham Nelson has done the same, and completely withdrawn from the IF scene?
>
> No, it is not possible he has done the same. Did you even bother to check
> his web site before posting this?
Yes. "Last updated with new material on March 22, 1998". That is eight months
ago, sir.
I usually check his website every so often, just to see if it's been updated.
So far it hasn't.
Please check http://www.gnelson.demon.co.uk yourself.
However, I do realise that if this site has not been removed, then it is
likely Mister Nelson is still involved with the IF community.
> > I am going to ignore this thread from now on.
>
> Oh you are, are you? You are either trying to start an row or you are being
> narrow-minded and selfish. In either case, I should never have written this;
> but I did because *I'm* being selfish too. Graham certainly doesn't need me
> sticking up for him.
I have no intention of starting a row. I never had any intention of starting a
row.
I have been rather... over-the-top with my commentary regarding Inform. I have
sounded rather narrow-minded and/or selfish, perhaps, with my complaints and
assumptions. I am frustrated with the current silence by Graham, however.
Let it be clear: I like Inform, and I respect Mister Nelson. But I am worried
by the current situation. I do not, will not attack the man personally. I may
complain about his decisions, but not about him.
I cannot ignore a thread in which I have been accused of more wrongs than I
have committed.
You can "stick up for" Mister Nelson all you like. I have no reason, no wish,
to attack him.
So, my unreserved apologies if I have sounded rather over-the-top.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
> >As you may be able to tell, I am rather annoyed at the Inform situation.
>
> However...
...
> >I am annoyed that Graham Nelson just seemed to stop developing Inform without
> >any warning....
>
> (...)
>
> >I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
> >expect to behave better.
>
> (...)
>
> >Of the "big three", the only system to have not been updated is Inform.
> >
> >This is not acceptable.
>
> Repeat after me:
>
> Graham Nelson does not owe you, or any other Inform user, anything.
> Graham Nelson is under no obligation to develop or support Inform in
> the future.
> Graham Nelson is not doing this as a professional, but as an amateur
> (in the original sense of the word) and is under no obligation to
> behave "professionally", whatever that may mean.
Graham owes no Inform user anything. He is under no obligation to develop or
support Inform in the future. He is doing this as an amateur.
> Proclaiming that Graham has "abandoned" Inform and starting a
> discussion about who should take over development is extremely rude,
> considering that Inform remains Graham's intellectual property. (On
> the other hand, asking Graham whether he intends to continue
> supporting it or if somebody else should take over is appropriate, if
> done in a polite way, but it's Graham's prerogative not to answer).
Which part of Inform? The Z-Machine isn't Graham's, I may point out.
I will ask Graham if he intends to continue developing or supporting Inform. I
doubt I'd get a reply, though.
> That said, I think everybody finds Graham's silence frustrating, but I
> really don't think being abusive will make him less reluctant to post.
I had not actually intended to be abusive to Mister Nelson, however sheer
anger at the Inform situation boiled over.
I like Inform. I respect Graham Nelson. But this silence over it by him
worries me.
LucFrench
said. I should warn you, I've been up for nearly twenty one hours, so I'm not
exactly coherant.)
>Look, asswipe.
>
>Graham owes you *NOTHING*.
Bzzt, wrong, but thank you for playing!
Unfortunatly, one of the duties anybody who builds a system has is spelled out
rather clearly in "The Cathedral And The Bazaar":
"When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand it off to
a competent successor."
It is his *duty* to hand it off, if he has lost interest in Inform.
It is his *duty* to at least describe why he has been silent.
These are some of the *duty*s of a maintainer.
Why are they *duty*s, you ask?
Well, for the same reason that the Federal Banking System exists (in the US):
To prevent panics (in the Feds case, financial; in Dr. Nelson's case, FUD
panic[1]). And I'd say we're in a growing FUD panic here.
Unless Graham acts soon, he may find several people e-mailing him, requesting
(nay, DEMANDING! (hhos)) his permission to take up the maintance of Inform for
him.
Thanks
Luc "Top of the World, Ma!" French
[1] FUD Panic: The overiding fear that your current system is obsolite. So
named because of its most common source, FUD attacks, although other sources
are not unheard of.
J. Kerr
>Neil and raif:
>At least Mike Roberts had the decency to announce he was discontinuing TADS
>development. No such announcement was forthcoming from Graham Nelson. His
>website has not been updated, Inform-wise, for eight months now (since
>libraries 6/7 came out, in fact).
>I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
>expect to behave better.
I don't think it's either fair or appropriate to throw accusations of
"unprofessionalism" at someone who has devoted a great deal of
(unpaid) time and effort to the IF community.
How about a sense of proportion here?
Matt Kimball
> >Graham owes you *NOTHING*.
> Bzzt, wrong, but thank you for playing!
> Unfortunatly, one of the duties anybody who builds a system has is
> spelled out rather clearly in "The Cathedral And The Bazaar":
> "When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to
> hand it off to a competent successor."
Are you sure Graham is playing by Eric Raymond's game? Inform isn't
exactly the canonical Bazaar project. From what I've seen, Graham's
development style has been *very* Cathedral.
> It is his *duty* to hand it off, if he has lost interest in Inform.
> It is his *duty* to at least describe why he has been silent.
> These are some of the *duty*s of a maintainer.
It is only his duty if he believes it is his duty. Regardless of what
ESR says, unpaid freeware developers only have the duties they choose
to have.
Sure, it would be nice if he would make some statement. It would also
be nice if Inform had a more free license. But neither of these
things are any sort of obligation.
--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com
Phase
>I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
>expect to behave better.
impresses the hell out of me. However, Graham made no commitment to
me with regards to these things, so I'm not bothered at all by his
"behavior". He gave us a free product. Enjoy it. He's not obligated
to give us a service as well. Live with it.
--
PHASEFX @ VM.SC.EDU - http://www.cs.sc.edu/~jason-e
Intelligence is supposed to be our greatest survival trait, yet
it is emotion that motivates us. Never rationalize away love.
Jon Petersen
Jon
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> Sure, it would be nice if he would make some statement.
However, I wouldn't want him to prematurely make some statment that
might not be accurate. If he is undecided, waiting may be the best
bet.
> It would also
> be nice if Inform had a more free license.
Frankly, I would prefer it didn't, unless and until Graham Nelson is
through developing it. You get more updates with a more open
license, but you also get more confusion.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> One killer case is the difficulty in overriding the held token - I'd
> prefer to see something like an implicit_take() function being called ...
> so that one
> could easily do something like
> > DRINK COLA
> (from the can)
> (taking the can first)
> You drink the cola. Mmm ... caffeine.
>
> > DRINK WATER
> (from the fountain)
> You take a sip of water from the fountain. Refreshing.
The obvious way to do that would be to replace the Sub and
grammar related to the Drink verb, which IMO any game
with potable liquids should do anyway.
> Have been giving serious thought to removing all references to the held
> token and doing parsing calls of implicits from the verb ...
That would be my approach. Either use a liquid attribute and use
that for your token or else write a noun=routine token for liquids.
Then DrinkSub checks to see what it needs to do implicitly.
Either that or the before rule does. That might be better.
Notice that in one case above you wanted to implicitely take
parent(noun) and in the other case you didn't. So maybe
the liquids class should check to see if its parent is something
that one can drink from without taking or not. Actually, there
should also be a third case (not in every game, but in general)
for things you can't drink from at all.
>Drink water
(The water in the toilet.)
Ewwww. Don't be disgusting.
> > (2) If objectloop made a list of its targets and then looped over
> > them, rather than sometimes using "sibling()", we wouldn't see so many
> > posts about the "I sawed off the branch I was standing on" bug.
> Doesn't even need to do that - just store the sibling at the very beginning.
>
> * I'd like to see possessives handled properly - having "john's" as a name
> for an object is a kludge.
That has potential. Actually, I'd theoretically like to see these
handled...
>Put the coin into the box that is on the desk
>Examine the mirror that is over the dresser
>Put one marble into the bag. Take any marble that is not in the bag.
...but I don't want to code it.
- jonadab
Jonadab the Unsightly One
> I am not impressed with this very unprofessional act from someone who I'd
> expect to behave better.
Unprofessional. Adjective. Characteristic of one who is not paid
for the service in question.
HTH.HAND.
> I am going to ignore this thread from now on. My response was anger. Not at
> you, but at Graham Nelson. Inform's users deserve better.
The world owes you something, does it? Get a life.
> Mister Forman told me that he deleted everything IF-related - games,
> interpreters, source code, everything - from his PC. Is it not possible that
> Graham Nelson has done the same, and completely withdrawn from the IF scene?
I think the key word here is "possible". Not the same as "known".
- jonadab
Doeadeer3
In article <72pjta$l5d$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, stuart...@my-dejanews.com
writes:
>I like Inform. I respect Graham Nelson. But this silence over it by him
>worries me.
>
>Bye,
>
>--
>Stuart Moore.
His silence worries me too. But it doesn't make me worry about Inform as
much...
as it makes me worry about Graham.
Doe :-)
Doe doea...@aol.com (formerly known as FemaleDeer)
****************************************************************************
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
Yes, Jon, I did. However, other postings made it imperative to respond.
I feel rather foolish about my arrogant, presumptious comments before. But
other people decided to accuse of more than I did wrong.
stuart...@my-dejanews.com
doea...@aol.com (Doeadeer3) wrote:
>
> In article <72pjta$l5d$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, stuart...@my-dejanews.com
> writes:
>
> >I like Inform. I respect Graham Nelson. But this silence over it by him
> >worries me.
> >
> >Bye,
> >
> >--
> >Stuart Moore.
>
> His silence worries me too. But it doesn't make me worry about Inform as
> much...
>
> as it makes me worry about Graham.
Why did you change your name? Or why did AOL make you change your name?
David Given
<Stuart...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>In article <F2IMn...@world.std.com>,
[...]
>> No, it is not possible he has done the same. Did you even bother to check
>> his web site before posting this?
>
>Yes. "Last updated with new material on March 22, 1998". That is eight months
>ago, sir.
>> > I am going to ignore this thread from now on.
>>
>> narrow-minded and selfish. In either case, I should never have written this;
>> but I did because *I'm* being selfish too. Graham certainly doesn't need me
>> sticking up for him.
>
>I have no intention of starting a row. I never had any intention of starting a
>row.
==============================================================================
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
==============================================================================
APPROACHING FLAME WAR
This thread has triggered the flame war detection sensors:
1. Use of `sir' with intent to injure.
2. Ad hominem attack.
3. Discussion of thread rather than of subject matter.
4. Direct contradiction.
It seems to be building in strength rapidly and may become hazardous.
Accordingly a level 2 flame war alert is being transmitted.
All personnel take cover in other threads IMMEDIATELY, your credibility
may be severely damaged if you do not. Countermeasures are being put into
place but are notoriously unreliable.
I repeat, take cover or your credibility may be severely damaged. If
personnel persist in remaining in this thread the flame war may become
self-sustaining (ref. The Great Gun Control Thread, rasfw) and there will
be a risk of it becoming a permanent shipping hazard.
==============================================================================
WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING!
==============================================================================
--
+- David Given ----------------+
| Work: d...@tao.co.uk | All law is codified revenge.
| Play: dgi...@iname.com |
+- http://wiredsoc.ml.org/~dg -+
John Menichelli
that suddenly make Inform "broken"? Didn't it perform just fine after
the last update?
Sure, there are always new features that people would like to see
added to any programming language, but that doesn't mean the current
version doesn't work. I'm sure that a perfectly good piece if IF may
be written using the current version of Inform.
Personally, I don't see what all the complaining is about.
Just my opinions...
John Menichelli
David Burke
>Sure, there are always new features that people would like to see
>added to any programming language, but that doesn't mean the current
>version doesn't work. I'm sure that a perfectly good piece if IF may
>be written using the current version of Inform.
>
>Personally, I don't see what all the complaining is about.
>
I work as an IT manager. Microsoft's continual releases of buggy
software make life difficult. I long for a stable release of a
product. So I am happy with Inform. The product works, the manual is
far better than the average documentation of "professional" software,
and the user support is good. Graham Nelson has already given us more
than we had any right to expect, he certainly owes us nothing.
--David Burke
Wanderer in the Fourth Dimension
www.btinternet.com/~david.burke/drwho2.html
Dugan Chen
<72cnb4$rhg$1...@newnews.global.net.uk>...
> How could the next versions of Inform improve upon it? (apart from adding
> blorb etc.. support). And when are we likely to see a next release?
Impossible. The current version of Inform is perfect.
Dugan Chen
<19981117041430...@ngol08.aol.com>...
> His silence worries me too. But it doesn't make me worry about Inform as
> much...
>
> as it makes me worry about Graham.
He's editing the Journal of Oxford Poetry and he published a poetry
book of his own. Relax.
e...@uclink4.berkeley.edu
Untrue. While I find this thread ridiculous, and the idea that we
are /owed/ anything disturbing and obnoxious, there are bugs with the
current release of Inform. They are just hard to get at. :) But
they're there (specifically, in the class.copy function; perhaps
in others). I've had to hack code to get it to work properly.
--Erik
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
> From: lucf...@aol.com (LucFrench)
>Bzzt, wrong, but thank you for playing!
>
>Unfortunatly, one of the duties anybody who builds a system has is spelled out
>rather clearly in "The Cathedral And The Bazaar":
You know, at first I thought you were joking, I really wish you were.
>"When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand it off to
>a competent successor."
The hell he does! Listion, if I write any code then it is MINE, not
yours, not anyone elses, just mine. This applies to any coder. If you or
whoever wrote this "The Cathedral And The Bazaar" crap don't like that
then they can write their own software. Nobody, and I menan NOBODY ever
demands anything from me, and I would hope most other authors would share
in this opinion. If an author wishes to release his or her source code
then that is THEIR decsion, NOT YOUR's or this "The Cathedral And The
Bazaar" group. How dare you or anyone else EVER demand that ohers give
you what is rightfully theres, how fucking dare you!
People you like you make me sick, you can't code so you demand someone do
all the work for you. If you want a new version of Inform then code it
your self, but NEVER demand the author and rightfull owner of some code
turn it over to you!
Patrick
Carl D. Cravens
>The hell he does! Listion, if I write any code then it is MINE, not
>yours, not anyone elses, just mine. This applies to any coder. If you or
>whoever wrote this "The Cathedral And The Bazaar" crap don't like that
>then they can write their own software. Nobody, and I menan NOBODY ever
>demands anything from me, and I would hope most other authors would share
>in this opinion. If an author wishes to release his or her source code
>then that is THEIR decsion, NOT YOUR's or this "The Cathedral And The
>Bazaar" group. How dare you or anyone else EVER demand that ohers give
>you what is rightfully theres, how fucking dare you!
Then I suggest that you log off this instant and cancel your internet
account... the Internet was *built* on people sharing software. People
who didn't *have* to share what they wrote, but did anyway because they
understood that cooperation makes the world a better place.
It works both ways... if you don't want to share, don't share what
others give 'cause you don't deserve it.
--
Carl D. Cravens (rave...@southwind.net)
He died to take away your sins, not your mind.
Magnus Olsson
Hey, chill it, both of you.
The Internet used to be like Carl writes. Its predecessor, the
ARPANET, even more so (this is second-hand, I wasn't on the net back
then). Today,most people just buy their Internet access and don't
feel any obligation to "pay back" by sharing. You may blame the
decay of Internet culture on this, I suppose.
As for "The Cathedral and the Bazaar": I haven't read it, but I gather
from what various people have written that the author is expressing
a set of *ideals*. If you share those ideals, then it may be your
duty to do certain things. But not all people share those ideals.
Branko Collin
>This is a flame, no chance of it being otherwise.
>
>> From: lucf...@aol.com (LucFrench)
>
>>Bzzt, wrong, but thank you for playing!
>>
>>Unfortunatly, one of the duties anybody who builds a system has is spelled out
>>rather clearly in "The Cathedral And The Bazaar":
>
>You know, at first I thought you were joking, I really wish you were.
>
>>"When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand it off to
>>a competent successor."
>
>The hell he does! Listion, if I write any code then it is MINE, not
>yours, not anyone elses, just mine. This applies to any coder. If you or
>whoever wrote this "The Cathedral And The Bazaar" crap don't like that
>then they can write their own software.
The author of "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", Eric S. Raymond, doesn't
demand anything AFAIK. He describes software development models.
Inform is developed according the Cathedral-model, Linux according the
Bazaar-model.
BTW, Patrick, whenever you follow-up a posting, it gets a new branch
in the thread (or worse, depending on what newsreader one uses). This
is because the references-header is ommited from your postings. Is
there a reason for this? It is somewhat annoying (but I am probably
the only one who thinks so).
--
branko
-- ik maak alles stuk
Andrew Plotkin
> The author of "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", Eric S. Raymond, doesn't
> demand anything AFAIK. He describes software development models.
> Inform is developed according the Cathedral-model, Linux according the
> Bazaar-model.
Like any categorization system, the borders are fuzzy in practice.
Inform's source code *is* available, and I *have* submitted bug fixes
that I tracked down using the source. Ditto the libraries.
That's the "distributed debugging" thing, which is one of the major points
of the Bazaar/Linux model. It's obviously not entirely absent from Inform.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
borogoves..."
Matt Kimball
> Branko Collin (col...@xs4all.nl) wrote:
> > The author of "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", Eric S. Raymond, doesn't
> > demand anything AFAIK. He describes software development models.
> > Inform is developed according the Cathedral-model, Linux according the
> > Bazaar-model.
> Like any categorization system, the borders are fuzzy in practice.
> Inform's source code *is* available, and I *have* submitted bug fixes
> that I tracked down using the source. Ditto the libraries.
> That's the "distributed debugging" thing, which is one of the major points
> of the Bazaar/Linux model. It's obviously not entirely absent from Inform.
Indeed -- the categories aren't rigid. I sent Graham a couple of bug
fixes as well, although I certainly haven't been as involved with
Inform as others have.
However, when Raymond describes the Cathedral development model, he
holds up the development style used by the techniques used by Free
Software Foundation and Richard Stallman as examples of the Cathedral.
Inform seems to be about as open as these examples: source code is
available, but the development process is otherwise closed. I'd feel
very comfortable calling Inform development Cathedral style.
I've talked to more than one person who had the misconception that
Raymond was attacking Microsoft's proprietary developments with his
paper. Microsoft is certainly *a* Cathedral, but not *the* Cathedral
which Raymond spoke of. (I'm not saying you held that misconception,
but I have seen it often).
Oh, and anyone who wants to read the original paper can find it at
http://www.earthspace.net/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/
--
Matt Kimball
mkim...@xmission.com
L. Ross Raszewski
smart enough to listen.
In article <E3A42.1281$y33.3...@newshog.newsread.com>,
pke...@mailexcite.com_x wrote:
>
> The hell he does! Listion, if I write any code then it is MINE, not
> yours, not anyone elses, just mine. This applies to any coder. If you or
> whoever wrote this "The Cathedral And The Bazaar" crap don't like that
> then they can write their own software. Nobody, and I menan NOBODY ever
> demands anything from me, and I would hope most other authors would share
> in this opinion. If an author wishes to release his or her source code
> then that is THEIR decsion, NOT YOUR's or this "The Cathedral And The
> Bazaar" group. How dare you or anyone else EVER demand that ohers give
> you what is rightfully theres, how fucking dare you!
"Nobody and I mean nobody ever demands anything from me"... Hm... what's that
like? I mean, daily, people demand things from me. And I don't get angry,
because I demand things from them too. Daily, my professors demand that I
attend their classes, that I do the work that they assign. THe consequences
if I don't meet their demands? I fail the class. My friends demand that I
be pleasant to them, that I am there for them, and that I let them be there
for me. The consequence if I don't meet their demands? THey stop being my
friends.
Of course, I gladly meet their demands, and they gladly meet the demands I
place on them. If they didn't want to meet the demands I place upon them,
then they probably shouldn't, but the sort of people who aren't wiulling to
meet the sort of demands I place on my friends aren't the sort of people I
like to be friends with. THat's how society works.
Now, I disagree wiuth Luc's tone, but not entirely with his message. The
reason I believe Dr. Nelson has not abandoned inform is because I _do_ expect
that if he had given up on it, he would have passed the torch. If I am proven
wrong, then yes, Dr. Nelson would have failed to meed a demand I placed upon
him. THe consequence would be the loss of some of the exceptional amount of
respect I have for him.
Sure, it's his "right" to keep it to himself, but it's also Luc French's right
to hold unpopular opinions. You have no trouble DEMANDing that he hold popular
opinions, and the consequence when he does not meet your demand is that you
flame him.
To my mind, having created a program which is widley used and loved does
carry some responsibility. If an author of a program decides to not only
abandon, but to effectively kill a program because he does not want ot work
on it, despite what its users may think, that author is not the sort of
person I like to hold in high esteem (I think the phrase "masturbating over a
keyboard" was once used). So, yes, I DEMAND that an author, having
permanantly abandoned a project, allow it to be taken over by someone else.
Dr. Nelson has not done this, therefore he has not abandoned inform. If I am
proven wrong in this, then I am also proven wrong in having a great deal of
respect and faith in Dr. Nelson.
>
> People you like you make me sick, you can't code so you demand someone do
> all the work for you. If you want a new version of Inform then code it
> your self, but NEVER demand the author and rightfull owner of some code
> turn it over to you!
>
Perhaps I don't know what you mean by "demand". If you mean "force", well
then yes, that's plainly wrong. Unfortunately, that doesn't make sense in the
context of LucFrench's statement. I don't recall that he ever called for
someone to march over to England and force the code out of Dr. Nelson.
If you mean "ask, placing conditions if the request is not met", then I find
your statement unacceptable. No society could function withouyt this
intercourse.
If you are going to fault LucFrench, the most you can get him for is sloppy
construction. Personally, I DO believe that it is Dr. Nelson's RESPONSIBILITY
to give inform to someone else when he is done with it. If he fails in this
responsibility, what action will I take? Not much. I'll probably ask him
again, very nicely. If he remains adamant, I will think less of him.
What should not be forgotten, of course, is that the rules of logic still
apply. IF Dr. Nelson is done with inform, I demand that he give it to someone
else. If he is not, I place no further condition on my respect for him.
Adam J. Thornton
Andrew Plotkin <erky...@netcom.com> wrote:
>Inform's source code *is* available, and I *have* submitted bug fixes
>that I tracked down using the source. Ditto the libraries.
>
>That's the "distributed debugging" thing, which is one of the major points
>of the Bazaar/Linux model. It's obviously not entirely absent from Inform.
However, the point clearly remains that Inform is Graham's and not a
project of the community at large. It is not under GPL, IIRC.
Those of you slinging ESR around--it's either in Cathedral or Noosphere
where he talks about the extreme diffidence with which an abandoned project
is picked up. Read *that* part. I believe that neither sufficient time
nor sufficient effort has yet been invested in determining whether Graham
is, in fact, done with Inform.
Adam
--
ad...@princeton.edu
"There's a border to somewhere waiting, and a tank full of time." - J. Steinman
Stephen van Egmond
In article <72v05d$jsr$1...@bartlet.df.lth.se>,
Magnus Olsson <m...@bartlet.df.lth.se> wrote:
>As for "The Cathedral and the Bazaar": I haven't read it, but I gather
>from what various people have written that the author is expressing
>a set of *ideals*. If you share those ideals, then it may be your
>duty to do certain things. But not all people share those ideals.
The paper was written by Eric S. Raymond, and you can see it at
http://www.redhat.com/redhat/cathedral-bazaar/ . The actual storage place
is at http://sagan.earthspace.net/esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ which
appears to be down.
Here is his summary:
"I anatomize a successful free-software project, fetchmail, that was run
as a deliberate test of some surprising theories about software
engineering suggested by the history of Linux. I discuss these theories in
terms of two fundamentally different development styles, the ``cathedral''
model of most of the commercial world versus the ``bazaar'' model of the
Linux world. I show that these models derive from opposing assumptions
about the nature of the software-debugging task. I then make a sustained
argument from the Linux experience for the proposition that ``Given enough
eyeballs, all bugs are shallow'', suggest productive analogies with other
self-correcting systems of selfish agents, and conclude with some
exploration of the implications of this insight for the future of
software."
The original citation of Cathedral/Bazaar theory was, though Patrick's
response stands. He is not obliged to give out something he created.
Carl was more or less quoting Stallman, but not the "get off the Internet"
part which I find unforgivably snotty. Stallman can be seen at his
looniest in the "Why Software Should Not Have Owners" essay at
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/why-free.html .
Graham asserts the moral right to be identified as Inform's author and to
impose terms on what can be done with it; Stallman approximately terms
this the "emotional argument" for ownership on
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html . He argues that "This
argument does not require serious refutation. The feeling of attachment is
one that programmers can cultivate when it suits them; it is not
inevitable. Consider, for example, how willingly the same programmers
usually sign over all rights to a large corporation for a salary; the
emotional attachment mysteriously vanishes. By contrast, consider the
great artists and artisans of medieval times, who didn't even sign their
names to their work. To them, the name of the artist was not important.
What mattered was that the work was done--and the purpose it would serve.
This view prevailed for hundreds of years."
Which is wrong on both points, but the flat in the second one is enough:
The great artisans lived in a culture that was markedly different from our
own. We live in a culture where credit *matters*, as do personal pride
and achievement.
In my opinion, ESR is right, Stallman takes himself way too seriously, GN
is one cool dude, and Stuart needs to relax about Inform. It bears
mentioning that you can make improvements to Inform and contribute them
back to its owner.
/Steve
--
,,,
(. .)
+--ooO-(_)-Ooo------------ --- -- - - - -
| Stephen van Egmond http://bang.ml.org/
Wildman, the Cuberstalker
>BTW, Patrick, whenever you follow-up a posting, it gets a new branch in the
>thread (or worse, depending on what newsreader one uses). This is because
>the references-header is ommited from your postings. Is there a reason for
>this? It is somewhat annoying (but I am probably the only one who thinks
>so).
I remember this as being a Usenet FAQ, but I can't recall the exact answer.
To the best of my knowledge, this is caused by the poster's news server.
Yes, it's annoying, but the poster can't do much about it.
Or I might be thinking of a different FAQ.
--
Wildman, the Cuberstalker
You know the Klingon proverb that tells whose revenge is a dish that is best
served cold? It is very cold....in Cuberspace.
Fight spam - http://www.cauce.org/
DO NOT SPAM THIS ADDRESS
LucFrench
>then yes, that's plainly wrong. Unfortunately, that doesn't make sense in the
>context of LucFrench's statement. I don't recall that he ever called for
>someone to march over to England and force the code out of Dr. Nelson.
Well, actually, if I were to demand something like that, I wouldn't demand the
code (we already have that), merely a change in the license, so that somebody
else could pick up the program.
A better fable about development systems then TADS should follow this post.
Thanks
Luc "The only hint: MZX." French
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>I remember this as being a Usenet FAQ, but I can't recall the exact answer.
>To the best of my knowledge, this is caused by the poster's news server.
>Yes, it's annoying, but the poster can't do much about it.
>Or I might be thinking of a different FAQ.
That may be it, or it could be that I post through Lynx (text-based web
browser) and it doesn't seem to add reference header :-(
Patrick
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>"Nobody and I mean nobody ever demands anything from me"... Hm... what's that
>like? I mean, daily, people demand things from me. And I don't get angry,
>because I demand things from them too. Daily, my professors demand that I
We are talking about totally different things here. You're talking about
courtisy and respect, I'm talking about walking up to someone and
demanding that they give you their wallet.
>To my mind, having created a program which is widley used and loved does
>carry some responsibility. If an author of a program decides to not only
>abandon, but to effectively kill a program because he does not want ot work
>on it, despite what its users may think, that author is not the sort of
>person I like to hold in high esteem (I think the phrase "masturbating over a
>keyboard" was once used). So, yes, I DEMAND that an author, having
>permanantly abandoned a project, allow it to be taken over by someone else.
>Dr. Nelson has not done this, therefore he has not abandoned inform. If I am
>proven wrong in this, then I am also proven wrong in having a great deal of
>respect and faith in Dr. Nelson.
Ok, let's look at this from a different angle. I have a very nice 89
Camero, but I haven't driven it in at least two years. In effect I have
abandoned it. Now, suppose some complete stranger walks up and says "I
belive you have abandoned that car, give it to me at once!" So, what do
you think I should do about it? Give him the car or tell him to piss off?
Do I ever plan on driving that car again? What does it matter, if I
choose to give away my car then it will be when and if I say so, not
becuse some drooling fan-boy has starting getting in my face about it.
>Perhaps I don't know what you mean by "demand". If you mean "force", well
Well, that's the common defination. You seem to consider requests and
demands to be one and the same.
>If you mean "ask, placing conditions if the request is not met", then I find
>your statement unacceptable. No society could function withouyt this
>intercourse.
Not quite sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like you condone
threats? "ask, placing conditions if the request is not met" is what
threats are made of.
>construction. Personally, I DO believe that it is Dr. Nelson's RESPONSIBILITY
Not quite, more like it's his RIGHT (people do have rights you know).
Nobody forced him to write Inform, so why should he be forced to give it
away?
>What should not be forgotten, of course, is that the rules of logic still
>apply. IF Dr. Nelson is done with inform, I demand that he give it to someone
>else. If he is not, I place no further condition on my respect for him.
This is what I just don't get. You demand people give you their property
when they are done with it? Good policy, next time I go to town I'll be
sure to ask everyone to surender everything they aren't using to me at
once. Yes, that will make me real popular fast.
Patrick
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>However, the point clearly remains that Inform is Graham's and not a
>project of the community at large. It is not under GPL, IIRC.
Exactly! I can't figure out why people are thinking otherwise.
Patrick
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>The author of "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", Eric S. Raymond, doesn't
>demand anything AFAIK. He describes software development models.
>Inform is developed according the Cathedral-model, Linux according the
>Bazaar-model.
Does it say in the Inform source that it follows this distribution system?
I've never seen that mentioned.
>BTW, Patrick, whenever you follow-up a posting, it gets a new branch
>in the thread (or worse, depending on what newsreader one uses). This
>is because the references-header is ommited from your postings. Is
>there a reason for this? It is somewhat annoying (but I am probably
>the only one who thinks so).
I find it annoying as much as anyone, but the only way to fix this with my
news poster (which is different from my new reader for verious reasons) is
to manualy build a references header for each post. This is something
that takes waay too much effort for the low-grade garbage I usually post
:-)
Patrick
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>Then I suggest that you log off this instant and cancel your internet
>account... the Internet was *built* on people sharing software. People
>who didn't *have* to share what they wrote, but did anyway because they
>understood that cooperation makes the world a better place.
I never argued against that. I mearly stated that being ordered to share
totally destroies the whole concept of sharing in the first place.
>It works both ways... if you don't want to share, don't share what
>others give 'cause you don't deserve it.
Everything I've ever written, both storie(s) and code, has been 100% free,
I give it all away, I have never made a cent at anything I've done on the
computer, except the occasional work for locale buisnesses. But, no one
has ever demanded that I give my stuff away, no one has ever demanded that
I share. The day that happins is the day I delete everything I've ever
released and abandon the whole concept of comunity sharing and tell
everyone to just piss off. I got into int-fic because I enjoyed the style
of writting and considered it a sophisticated art form. The prople that
were into int-fic seemed to be good considerate people. But lately that
has all changed, the people have gotten greedy. I can stand a lot of
things with the people I hang out with, but greed just makes me sick.
Greed is what is destroying our world and greed is what has destroied this
newsgroup.
Patrick
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>Hey, chill it, both of you.
Sorry, I kinda went over the top yesterday.
>then). Today,most people just buy their Internet access and don't
>feel any obligation to "pay back" by sharing. You may blame the
>decay of Internet culture on this, I suppose.
I have done my share of "paying back" over the years, but I was never
ordered to do so. That is the whole point of this entire thing, being
ordered to share something is absured. People share because they want to
help others. Every single time I've helped someone, either here or
anywhere else in my life, it is because I wanted to help them. But seeing
someone being ordered to help people is a slap in the face, to me and
everyone else who has ever helped someone out of the goodness of their
heart. If the only reason you help someone is because it's expected from
you, then you don't trully know what it means to share :-(
Patrick
LucFrench
such things, please, skip this post.]
Patrick Kellum wrote:
>Ok, let's look at this from a different angle. I have a very nice 89
>Camero, but I haven't driven it in at least two years. In effect I have
>abandoned it. Now, suppose some complete stranger walks up and says "I
>belive you have abandoned that car, give it to me at once!" So, what do
>you think I should do about it? Give him the car or tell him to piss off?
>Do I ever plan on driving that car again? What does it matter, if I
>choose to give away my car then it will be when and if I say so, not
>becuse some drooling fan-boy has starting getting in my face about it.
Bad metaphore, Sir.
Nobody else is using your car, right?
It would appear that you are intentionally trying to distort the arguement,
rather then actually making one. This is a notable tendancy of Trolls and
(F)lamers.
If the charge of Trolling is true, and if you don't mind, go FOAD, Troll. And
Get A Real Newsreader, while you're at it.
Thanks
Luc "Trollslayer" French
pke...@mailexcite.com_x
>Bad metaphore, Sir.
>
>Nobody else is using your car, right?
Should that really matter?
>It would appear that you are intentionally trying to distort the arguement,
>rather then actually making one. This is a notable tendancy of Trolls and
>(F)lamers.
You're calling me a troll? You demand the authors of int-fic development
systems bow down and kiss your feet and you're calling me a troll?
>Get A Real Newsreader, while you're at it.
Piss off.
Patrick
Erik Max Francis
> You're calling me a troll? You demand the authors of int-fic
> development
> systems bow down and kiss your feet and you're calling me a troll?
Keep in mind who you're replying to, here.
--
Erik Max Francis / email m...@alcyone.com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger m...@sade.alcyone.com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ Fear is an emotion indispensible for survival.
/ Hannah Arendt
Erik Max Francis
> Bad metaphore, Sir.
>
> Nobody else is using your car, right?
So what?
> It would appear that you are intentionally trying to distort the
> arguement,
> rather then actually making one. This is a notable tendancy of Trolls
> and
> (F)lamers.
The biggest contributor to trolling and flaming that I've seen here is
you, bub.
Erik Max Francis
> Well, actually, if I were to demand something like that, I wouldn't
> demand the
> code (we already have that), merely a change in the license, so that
> somebody
> else could pick up the program.
And it is not your right to demand that. Which is exactly the point.
Doeadeer3
In article <72rqgv$igt$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, stuart...@my-dejanews.com
writes:
>Why did you change your name? Or why did AOL make you change your name?
>
>Bye,
>
>--
>Stuart Moore.
Because I lost my old account and when I signed back up, someone had taken my
name :-(.
In aol if someone has your name you can still have it but with lots of numbers
behind it and it has to be of a limited length, so I would have been FemaleDr15
or something stupid. I decided I liked being a 3 better than a 15 or 20 or
something and I also thought FemaleDeer was no fun abbreviated.
Doe :-) While doeadeer refers to the same sickening sweet but cute song.
Doe doea...@aol.com (formerly known as FemaleDeer)
****************************************************************************
"In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane." Mark Twain
Doeadeer3
In article <01be121a$620cac80$3f8e42d8@desktop>, "Dugan Chen"
<chen...@direct.ca> writes:
>He's editing the Journal of Oxford Poetry and he published a poetry
>book of his own. Relax.
Aha. That explains much.
I always get afraid he is p*ssed at us for some reason (no, not about Tempest,
he is bigger than that.)
Doe :-)
Doeadeer3
Seems this thread degenerated into discussion about Graham's whereabouts, but I
would like to stick up my wish list. In descending order, though 3 and 2 could
be switched:
1. New VM.
2. OO library.
3. Better conversation techinques, someway that once a NPC is addressed the
first time, "Bob, tell me about the...", it can be readdressed without the name
and comma. I suspect that section of the parser dealing with a not_understood
order and turning it into an answer, "tell Bob such and such", is the crucial
spot. If Graham doesn't change that I would like a "hook" into that section so
programmers can do with it what they will it. Like turn it into a question
instead depending on some flag (and do what I said above too).
5. A different and better ReviseMulti.
4. Fix bugs in current library.
5. HTML, graphic or whatever support. (I am not really sure what blorb is).
L. Ross Raszewski
pke...@mailexcite.com_x wrote:
>
[bit about the car snipped: my reply: if I had an 89 camaro, and didn't plan
on ever doing anything with it, not even seling it, then I would consider it
small of myself not to dipose of it in some manner. I also think it's small
of people not to check the organ donor box on their driver's license
applications (excepting those with religious convictions ot the contrary)
Moreover, Yes, I'd tell this hypothetical person to piss off. I'm within my
rights to doso, and he's within his rights to make the demand.]
> >Perhaps I don't know what you mean by "demand". If you mean "force", well
>
> Well, that's the common defination. You seem to consider requests and
> demands to be one and the same.
No, you seem to consider them one in the same. I read the post to which your
flame was directed, and, unless my newsreader mangled it, there is no mention
of forcing Graham Nelson to surrender inform. Your post presumed that
LucFrench was advicating *forcing* Dr. Nelson to surrender it.
>
> >If you mean "ask, placing conditions if the request is not met", then I find
> >your statement unacceptable. No society could function withouyt this
> >intercourse.
>
> Not quite sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like you condone
> threats? "ask, placing conditions if the request is not met" is what
> threats are made of.
>
Mmm... not quite. Well... yes. Sort of. If the condition if the request is
not met is wrong. then the demand is wrong. Plain and simple. "I demand that
you give me your car. Fail to do this and I will shoot you." is a wrong
demand. "I demand that you give me your car. Fail to do this and I will not
pay you $10000" is not a wrong demand. "I demand that if you are done with
inform, you give it to someone else. Fail to do this, and I will lose respect
for you" is not a wrong demand.
> >construction. Personally, I DO believe that it is Dr. Nelson's RESPONSIBILITY
>
> Not quite, more like it's his RIGHT (people do have rights you know).
> Nobody forced him to write Inform, so why should he be forced to give it
> away?
It's his RIGHT not to give it away. I tend to think of a responsibility as a
right which, if not exercized, shows negligence. I think that's a fair
definition. It's certainly the way I usually hear it used. You keep
insisting that saying "it would be wrong for Dr. Nelson to keep inform from
being developed if he does not wish to do it himself" somehow takes away his
right to keep inform even if he is done with it. (Perhaps I should say that
"I believe it is wrong" rahter than "it is wrong", but sicne wrongness is a
subjective term, I believe that "I believe that" would be redundant)
You cannot keep something which you never plan to use _for any purpose_ and
not lose my respect. This is a statement of fact. Does it make me a small
person? Possibly, but I don't think so. If inform was, say, the beginnings of
a cure to a dread disease, and Dr. Nelson did not wish to refine it further,
it would certainly be his right not to distribute it. But I would guess that
there are few people who would respect him for that decision.
>
> >What should not be forgotten, of course, is that the rules of logic still
> >apply. IF Dr. Nelson is done with inform, I demand that he give it to someone
> >else. If he is not, I place no further condition on my respect for him.
>
> This is what I just don't get. You demand people give you their property
> when they are done with it? Good policy, next time I go to town I'll be
> sure to ask everyone to surender everything they aren't using to me at
> once. Yes, that will make me real popular fast.
You seem to be insisting that I am talking about something that one is not
using at the moment. I'm talking about things which one is not planning to
use for any purpose ever. That's why I have never "demanded" or "requested"
that Dr. Nelson give up inform to someone else. I DON'T think he's done with
it. If Graham posted a message tomorrow that he was goign to update inform,
but not for a year, I would be fine with that. If he said nothing,. I would
be fine with that. But idf he said "I have given up on inform. It will never
be updated again, but it's still mine. No one is allowed to update it, ever.
If I catch you trying,I'll sue you for everything you've got," that's his
right. But I'd lose respect in him for it. I would consider him negligent.
Well, phrased properly, it probably would not make you many enemies. If
you're insisting that a "demand" must be a request which is phrased
impolitely and which carries unpleasdant consequences if not met, that's fair
enough. THat's how I use it. But it that's true, then you're flaiming
LucFrench for no reason. He never said anything about "demanding", in the
sense you speak of.
It doesn't even make SENSE that we could "demand" that Dr. Nelson do
anything, by your meaning. What recourse could we possibly have? So yes, I
DEMAND that someone who will not use an item of their property for ANY
purpose EVER give it to someone else. If they don't, I will take the only
recourse I can -- I will consider them to be greedy bastards.
I've been assuming you meant "demand" in the sense of "strong request",
because otherwise, you were flaming with no cause.
I read your little "temper tantrum" about leaving the group becasue it's all
about greed. I am sorry you feel this way. if you wish to release your
source, I'd greatly appreciate it. If you delete it, I'll lose some respect
for you, for being a greedy bastard.
(I can't believe I'm DEFENDING LucFrench)
L. Ross Raszewski
doea...@aol.com (Doeadeer3) wrote:
>
> Seems this thread degenerated into discussion about Graham's whereabouts, but
I
> would like to stick up my wish list. In descending order, though 3 and 2 could
> be switched:
>
> 1. New VM.
Might be nice someday, but since I'm not pleased with any of the ideas that
have been batted about (I know I'm alone in this, but I prefer v6's screen
model to glk's), and since I can expand Z's effective low memory as much as I
(personally) like, I'd just like some more high memory.
> 2. OO library.
One of those things I have no real use for. I think OO is overrated, myself.
There are very few problems which I would solve using all of the facets of OO
(though I would solve most problems using some of the facets of OO) (I know
I'm alone in this too)
> 3. Better conversation techinques, someway that once a NPC is addressed the
> first time, "Bob, tell me about the...", it can be readdressed without the
name
> and comma. I suspect that section of the parser dealing with a not_understood
> order and turning it into an answer, "tell Bob such and such", is the crucial
> spot. If Graham doesn't change that I would like a "hook" into that section so
> programmers can do with it what they will it. Like turn it into a question
> instead depending on some flag (and do what I said above too).
Not too hard. If I wasn't so (a) busy and (2) in favor of menu-based
conversations (I know I'm alone in... you get the idea), I might work on a
library for that.
> 5. A different and better ReviseMulti.
Haven't broken it yet. What's the problem again?
> 4. Fix bugs in current library.
Darned right (again, I don't remember what the bugs in the library are. Though
the "transfer" verb should be hacked out anmd set on fire.)
> 5. HTML, graphic or whatever support. (I am not really sure what blorb is).
Call your interprer providers. Ask for v6 and blorb support. I don't much
care for html -- I don't want to have to write in two languages at the same
time, but I do think that the graphics and windowing capabilities of v6 could
certainly do whatever you want. With v6lib, it's not even that hard.
it's good, though, to have some idea of the diredtions we should be going in.
Thanks for helping to get us back on track
Branko Collin
>> From: col...@xs4all.nl (Branko Collin)
>
>>The author of "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", Eric S. Raymond, doesn't
>>demand anything AFAIK. He describes software development models.
>>Inform is developed according the Cathedral-model, Linux according the
>>Bazaar-model.
>
>Does it say in the Inform source that it follows this distribution system?
>I've never seen that mentioned.
No, but to use an analogy: most companies do not explicitly state that
they follow the capitalist model. The "a" doesn't know it belongs to
the Western alfabet.
It is possible to classify something from the outside, to have an
opinion about it.
LucFrench
Well, you know what they say about the lesser of two kooks...
[For those of you who don't, it's "The reasonable man, in debate, often finds
himself defending the lesser of two kooks." (It goes on, but that's another
matter.)]
Thanks
Luc "A. Plutonium" French