Re: XyWrite and C (in the 21st century)

[russurquhart1@xxxxxxxx]

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 8:35 PM, Robert Holmgren wrote:
** Reply to message from Bill Troop  on
Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:43:57 +0100
All successful programs of this age have had complete albeit painful
codebase rewrites. Why should XyWrite be excepted?

Why "should" it be excepted? Is there some imperative operating
here? It takes somebody with access to the sourcecode, who has
tons of time and interest, and doesn't expect much or any
remuneration: independently wealthy + completely idle +
first-class programmer + XyQuest or NB insider would be perfect.
Do you have somebody in mind?

R.
As i've said on other occasions, I would like to have a version of Xy
that works natively on OS X. (Since we're saying what we want! :) ) But
let me propose an idea. I think we all have an idea of where Xy fits and
what it should be or NOT be. Whatever that is, I think Xy is a category
of programs like (La)Tex, vi, and emacs. These editors/text processors
started out being developed for specific needs and architectures and
over the years have been ported/enhanced/reinterpreted to meet the needs
of that sect needing this new incarnation. However, purists can still
find and use the original versions of these editors, as that suits their
needs.
To me, if there was an argument for having the source to XY made
available, it would be so that it might have the same opportunities as
well. Will anyone who does this make money? Probably not, but then the
main people behind the LaTex, vi, and emacs didn't do it for the money
either. Examining the source code would certainly be dauting, but if the
Source were open you could have a LOT of people looking at it. (You
might also have a former XyQuest/NB employee with some time on his hands
willing to tinker on this now open source.)

Robert, as always has valid and realistic points.
NB Win is Xy for the windows environment and the most recent/up to date
incarnation of Xy. If i were solely working in the windows environment,
I would be looking at NB Win. (If i ever get an Intel based mac, i might
still.) Anne, any plans for an OS X port? :)
Also, opening the source will not affect a change today or tomorrow, or
maybe ever. It might be impossible to find anyone willing/capable of
working on the code to produce a new version. (I'll also add that you
would also need to manage such a project as well. If one or more people
begin contributing code, this becomes a management nightmare.)
With that said, I think about all the people that we have listed on this
mailing list, over the years. People who liked and used Xywrite, and for
whatever reason, left to go to M$ or some other wordprocessor. (Herb
Tyson comes to mind.) These people might be intrigued by the idea of an
Open Sourced Xy, that they might be able to lend support or point us to
some developers that could.
Certainly this is a lot of if's and maybe's, but i can't see how opening
the source would affect negatively what we already have?

fwiw,

Russ