[Lazarus] Release 1.0, part 2

[Tom Lisjac]

On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Marco van de Voort <marcov at stack.nl> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 09:14:52PM -0700, Tom Lisjac wrote:
>> The problem I see is credibility... or "if we write a lot of code with
>> Lazarus/FPC, will it be maintainable with the project in perpetual
>> beta?".
>
> Personally I think this discussion is funny, weeks before 2.4.0 comes out
> and lazarus faces a transition to a new resources system.

Of course technology evolves and changes will need to be introduced
over time... the problem is that better version control needs to start
now so pure app coders won't have to be in the development loop on a
daily basis to keep up.

In the current beta model, changes are  added "on the fly" and anyone
developing code has to follow the development track on an almost daily
basis to keep their code working. This isn't realistic for a wider
audience that just wants to use the tool to write apps and have
confidence that they'll be able to compile them next year without
having to review all the development threads and changes that took
place in between.

Formalizing a 1.0 would establish a well defined baseline and make it
possible to provide release notes that describe exactly what aspects
of the 1.0 code would be impacted when moving to version 2, 3, 4, etc.
On the other hand, if the project keeps wandering around in a beta
state where changes continue to be introduced "on the fly", all the
code that's currently out there will continue to become more and more
broken with each passing day without a clear path for getting it
fixed.

> Anyway, if I have to choose between credibility for Delphi users searching
> for a quick fix, and the more deeply committed serious contributing users, I
> know which I choose.
>
> The serious users will consider the current restrained version policy as
> more serious and see through a cheap spin.

I would agree if I believed that Lazarus/FPC had any "serious users".
Other then the core development team, their employers and people who
closely follow the development track, who is using this toolchain for
deploying serious public or commercial work?

That wasn't a frivolous question and if such a listing exists, I'd be
very interested in seeing it and noting its length. Here in the US,
doing a search on hotjobs.com for "Lazarus" returns "Sorry, we didn't
find any Lazarus jobs". A search for "Delphi" returns a total of 17
nationwide whereas "Java" returns 2,817, "C#" 1,159 and "Linux" 1,817.
Delphi is already a relic in the US, but with changes, I hope there's
still a future for Lazarus/FPC as a serious commercial tool.

In another part of this thread someone pointed out that more
developers are needed then users. I disagree. From my perspective, the
Linux kernel again provides a useful model for a successful project
that started with one guy. Once the kernel had achieved "critical
mass" on a technical level (meaning it basically worked), Linus was
able to "sell" a bunch of other people on trying it out... and some of
those people were developers. What happened next is part of history.

Lazarus has had "critical mass" for a long time. Even in 2002 I found
it to be a very capable and stable tool and I thoroughly enjoyed
working with it. In it's current state it is nothing short of awesome!
What is needed now is to get more people actually looking at it... and
if we can achieve that higher visibility and enthusiasm within the
larger community, some of those new users will be developers.

Where the days of Delphi are fading, the story of Lazarus is still
evolving. At this point I see it as a developer's project that has
been "almost ready" for wider use for far too many years. It's true
that 1.0 is just a number... but it is the one that will clearly
signal our "critical mass" and hopefully be the trigger that will
start moving this great tool into the programming mainstream... and
the job market.

Thanks,

-Tom