The intention of having clear definitions is not having competing standards, it’s the opposed, is avoiding a future mess because of some easy definitions to start things. Been there in another environment. In the past, when many developers “started” their own libraries, naming conventions and practices, in one point, we had a huge set of public messed libraries because everybody started your own library as they wanted. We had even names shocking and even some libraries couldn’t be used together. It just changed when a group of good fellow developers got together as volunteers to try to get the best of those messed libraries, naming then accordingly, even the functions and methods, cleaning code, naming globals and constants, and presented the initial results. People immediately approved and even some paid code were donated to the effort . They, together, built an great library those days, removed duplications and made a good documentation. Was a big effort because involved reworking things that started wrong. The name of the project was Project Jedi. Some old fellows here probably can recognize it.
Except these things started many years ago, and are being used by lots of developers now. So renaming then them for renaming’s own sake will inconvenience people who already depend on them.
Again, if you want to name new ones or rename existing ones, you do the work and see if anyone jumps aboard. My bet is that there isn’t any value in that. I’d be happy to be proven wrong.
Not necessarily true. Sometimes was just a question of find/replace. When we start things, with planning, there is a planned change too. Things still as it is until a launch time. Devs are prepared for the changes. Many of those functionalities “years ago” changed the name, and devs with a hypothetical “mySoft v1.75” changed the old “libs”, made few adjustments, used new components, and launched the “mysoft v2.0”. Some others, more resilient to the changes, kept the old libraries as is for more than one year and just adjusted their own part for v.1.76, 1.77 until finally jumping in to the new updated set.
I’ll not discuss this subject anymore, my part here was done. I bet someone will come up with this discussion in the future, with another group. Let’s see what will happen. 
Well ARBP is currently the guardian of the WFS suite but not actively maintaining/upgrading it. I’m sure for a commitment of fixes/upgrades from someone we would consider renaming it. IE: What Brad said
Hi Phillip, you told a key thing for me, we need some guardian group for those public libraries/plugins. Never an individual. That said, let’s postpone this conversation until the rise of a new public library for Linux, iOs, or whatever.
I’d suggest reading Eric Raymond’s “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”, particular this section:
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/homesteading/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s10.html
You will find in this community that roughly 100% (give or take 0%) of what’s interesting is the work of one or two people. That can have its disadvantages, like when an author of a very nice PDF library decided he wanted to focus on college, but that’s how things go sometimes. There are less expensive and more effective strategies to solve that particular problem than organizing people.
It’s unfortunate that instead of just abandoning it, that once he decided he was not going to sell/support it any more, he did not open source it.
- Karen
[quote=9116:@Karen Atkocius]It’s unfortunate that instead of just abandoning it, that once he decided he was not going to sell/support it any more, he did not open source it.
- Karen
[/quote]
True. I got my $100 of use out of it, then billed more than 5x to replace the pieces we needed :-). There are enough of us that realize that source code is not the pinnacle of the value chain now. There are good examples of how not to cause that problem, yet still get paid or get credit for one’s efforts.
[quote=9114:@Richard “Brad” Hutchings]I’d suggest reading Eric Raymond’s “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”, particular this section:
http://www.catb.org/esr/writings/homesteading/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s10.html
You will find in this community that roughly 100% (give or take 0%) of what’s interesting is the work of one or two people. That can have its disadvantages, like when an author of a very nice PDF library decided he wanted to focus on college[/quote]
Actually he went to college & now works for SpaceX 
Aaron’s at CERT or something now.
Charles still does a fair amount of work on MacOSLib.
Reality is that as Brad suggested there are a lot of cool products that are not communally driven or developed.
They’re largely the work of a lone developer.
Anyone wanting to change that should help the ARBP out & get their repositories back online & perhaps initiate a project to write a listbox replacement or any of the other things that have been suggested over the years (FTP classes, SMTP / POP classes, you name it)
I don’t know what people asks you guys to fix or evolve in the ListBox, but Open Source the current ListBox code and I can start a collaborative initiative on GitHub and move the guard to ARBP to guarantee the project survival and management (developers die or simply lose the interest in some things, but groups are harder to be terminated).
Or simply donate it directly to ARBP, with the compromise from them of opening the collaborative effort to evolve the component.
The name is what the original author named it. Aaron Ballman.
[quote=9190:@Ricardo Araujo]I don’t know what people asks you guys to fix or evolve in the ListBox, but Open Source the current ListBox code and I can start a collaborative initiative on GitHub and move the guard to ARBP to guarantee the project survival and management (developers die or simply lose the interest in some things, but groups are harder to be terminated).
Or simply donate it directly to ARBP, with the compromise from them of opening the collaborative effort to evolve the component.[/quote]
all code libraries that the ARBP owns is open sourced and will be hosted at GitHub and BitBucket (to make sure the code doesnt get taken away from us). We will be more than happy to be the guardians of the code and accept as & all updates to them.
[quote=9190:@Ricardo Araujo]I don’t know what people asks you guys to fix or evolve in the ListBox, but Open Source the current ListBox code and I can start a collaborative initiative on GitHub and move the guard to ARBP to guarantee the project survival and management (developers die or simply lose the interest in some things, but groups are harder to be terminated).
Or simply donate it directly to ARBP, with the compromise from them of opening the collaborative effort to evolve the component.[/quote]
The real way to guarantee survival of code is for people to use it. The best way is for the authors to use it and depend on it. Whether they’re formal open source projects, free code, or commercial, that’s the ultimate incentive. That condition isn’t just met a priori for a listbox replacement whether it’s homegrown or derived from donated source.
If you’re passionate about listboxen, write one, then share it and see if it will stick. That’s the process. That’s how you get people to contribute either their time or money to support something. Working code is the currency, not grand plans or organization.
No. I am passionate for collaboration. We all know you are against efforts like that. Note taken. No need to reinforce that all the time.
I must have missed something - Ricardo - your asking for Xojo to simply hand over their ListBox code?
[quote=9201:@Ricardo Araujo]No. I am passionate for collaboration.
[/quote]
And that’s why you’re getting pushback on this. People here want code. Whether that code is created by a single Ayn Rand reading wild buffalo burger eating gun nut or a collective of vegan pacifists is at best a tertiary consideration. A secondary consideration is continuation of availability and maintenance of the code. As I said above, there are many models for this. Most important, in my mind, is that the author has skin in the game and depends on the code he shares for something else. But code is the currency, not organization. Without passion for a particular product, organization doesn’t have any value in this space.
(Patrick, yeah, I think he asked for that.)
No, I was giving Norman a solution for a problem he rose. He stated that the community asked for a ListBox replacement (and other things) probably due to lacking features that Xojo, by whatever, don’t want to put efforts on it. So I offered a possible way, transfer the efforts of enhancing it for the community. No need to transfer the rights.
But Xojo would have to release the code to you for you to able to enhance?
Enhance their component, yes. Build a new one, no. And there is no me. [quote=9190:@Ricardo Araujo]donate it directly to ARBP, with the compromise from them of opening the collaborative effort to evolve the component.[/quote]