3 ms·

Yes I delayed the release by 2 days to clean up readme. "Lol"

lifthrasiir 7y ago
This is the first time I've ever heard of why the source release was delayed. I have also managed to see the related issue [1], which was posted too late. You should have said at the first time. [2] You have instantly earned much reputation by releasing Volt at the first time; that reputation is much easier to lose as well. People easily gets disappointed, no matter what you have achieved (or think that you can achieved); you should be very careful. Or you can stack much reputation that your mistake or short-sighted action doesn't harm yourself. [1] https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/287 https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/287 [2] Not that I like this form of release. Proprietary languages simply don't work in the modern world.
- amedvednikov 7y ago
  I'm sorry, proprietary languages? What are you referring to?
  - lifthrasiir 7y ago
    A pledge to make your language free (as in freedom defined by FSF [1], so its antonym is proprietary) is not an open source by itself. Currently your language is not free. EDIT: s/open source/free/ [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
    - amedvednikov 7y ago
      V is going to be released in 2 days and be free with a permissive license. You can't call an unreleased language proprietary.
      - lifthrasiir 7y ago
        You have a working playground and have briefly released a binary. At the very least the second qualifies as a distribution, an important event when we are talking about F/OSS. Your language is therefore still proprietary. Many current programmers think F/OSS as a norm and proprietary (released or not) as exceptionally shady. Even though some may think proprietary software is acceptable, something being F/OSS is a label with the non-trivial amount of value. Your act can be interpreted as claiming that value without actually being F/OSS, no matter what was your intention.
      - bendmorris 7y ago
        Honestly, what is the holdup on releasing the source? Other languages are developed entirely out in the open - what are you worried about? Why not just release it today in whatever state it's in, as was previously promised? Without releasing it you're expecting people to put blind faith in you.
- amedvednikov 7y ago
  > This is the first time I've ever heard of why the source release was delayed. My comment was sarcasm by the way. And sorry for the delay, I was sleeping.

This is the first time I've ever heard of why the source release was delayed. I have also managed to see the related issue [1], which was posted too late. You should have said at the first time. [2] You have instantly earned much reputation by releasing Volt at the first time; that reputation is much easier to lose as well. People easily gets disappointed, no matter what you have achieved (or think that you can achieved); you should be very careful. Or you can stack much reputation that your mistake or short-sighted action doesn't harm yourself. [1] https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/287 https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/287 [2] Not that I like this form of release. Proprietary languages simply don't work in the modern world.

amedvednikov 7y ago
I'm sorry, proprietary languages? What are you referring to?
- lifthrasiir 7y ago
  A pledge to make your language free (as in freedom defined by FSF [1], so its antonym is proprietary) is not an open source by itself. Currently your language is not free. EDIT: s/open source/free/ [1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
  - amedvednikov 7y ago
    V is going to be released in 2 days and be free with a permissive license. You can't call an unreleased language proprietary.
    - lifthrasiir 7y ago
      You have a working playground and have briefly released a binary. At the very least the second qualifies as a distribution, an important event when we are talking about F/OSS. Your language is therefore still proprietary. Many current programmers think F/OSS as a norm and proprietary (released or not) as exceptionally shady. Even though some may think proprietary software is acceptable, something being F/OSS is a label with the non-trivial amount of value. Your act can be interpreted as claiming that value without actually being F/OSS, no matter what was your intention.
    - bendmorris 7y ago
      Honestly, what is the holdup on releasing the source? Other languages are developed entirely out in the open - what are you worried about? Why not just release it today in whatever state it's in, as was previously promised? Without releasing it you're expecting people to put blind faith in you.
amedvednikov 7y ago
> This is the first time I've ever heard of why the source release was delayed. My comment was sarcasm by the way. And sorry for the delay, I was sleeping.