Re: [Fresco-devel] Re: ACE

M. Evans wrote:

> Or, that ACE's CORBA wrappers are incomplete, in which case it's better
> for you to contribute to ACE (factoring, interfacing) than to re-invent
> ACE on a smaller scale.

sorry, but you don't sound as if you know what you are talking about.
What is your point ?

We develop a windowing system, not an ORB. And our needs are perfectly
well covered with Prague. What interest should we have to drop that
in favor of ACE ? (And I don't even try to understand why you throw in
the term 'IDL' every now and again.)

[...and on with ACE...]

> So far all I've heard is that it's too hard to build, so you gave up
> and rolled your own code.

No-one said that.

> Seems to me it would make more sense to
> contribute to the ACE project.  You lecture me about "forking," but
> this Prague thing is a prime example of exactly that -- forking.

What a nonsense.

> Not
> in the strict technical sense, but in the broad sense.  There is
> no more serious fork than starting a whole new project to do the same
> thing.
> 
> This is how open source efforts defeat themselves, constantly reinventing
> wheels.  There are probably two dozen smaller Prague equivalents out
> there if ACE is not to your liking.  Argue all you want about ACE,
> there are many other libraries -- and now heaven help us, another one,
> Prague.

Prague has been in existence (and use !) for quite a couple of years.

>>Saying "it's always easier to strip things down" is simply not true in
>>the real world, and makes me wonder how much time you've spent doing
>>actual engineering.
> 
> 
> Oh come on.  I'm a professional making six figures.  I know my code
> and how to manage my time.  I've seen the not-invented-here syndrome
> before.

so what ? Just because you'v seen it (I did, too) doesn't mean 
everything is befallen from it.
(and please, don't try to impress us with the number of figures you
make, this is not the place where people care)

> Besides, my goodness, I can't believe what I'm hearing -- people
> interested in slim libraries who depend upon CORBA, the most notorious
> bloatware in the known universe.
> 
> IDLs are supposed to hide internal dependencies, let you use what
> interfaces you want, etc.  Even if ACE lacks required interfaces, it
> would be more sensible for Fresco to contribute them than re-invent

again, where did you read that ACE lacks interfaces we require ?

> pieces of ACE.  Or to find another open-source library more to your
> liking.  The problems solved by Prague have been solved before, many
> many times.

I developed Prague ~8 years ago, and yes, even at that time the problems
had been solved elsewhere. So what ? We do try to reuse existing 
software when we can. In fact, we do so quite heavily, just look at our
dependencies page. But everything in good measure.

>>However, because TAO uses ACE, it generates extremely bloated
>>libraries, so huge that Stefan never even tried using them.  This
>>could be considered a bug in TAO.
> 
> 
> So the obvious solution is to work on TAO not ex nihilo creation of
> ACE-lite.

it's your ignorance that makes you think we rewrite ACE. Either listen
to what we have to say (or read what we have to write on 
http://fresco.org), or stop throwing ridiculous claims at us.

> Besides, I think the whole overkill notion belies a failure on your
> part to appreciate the potential for growth in Fresco.  You might find
> ten years from now that Prague has become ACE in all but name.

may be, may be not. Within these ten years a lot may happen, and we
don't want to drag in a weight as heavy as ACE right now just because
we may want to depend on it in ten years anyways.

> Actually I'm a very nice person.  Just very opinionated. :-)

Fine with me, if you could be a bit more reasoned, too :-)

Stefan