[erlang-questions] Time for OTP to be Renamed?

[Tristan Sloughter]

Yet provided no proof that changing the word Telecom would improve
adoption or that it hurts adoption.



Additionally no proof that causing adoption based on some name changes
and marketing are a good thing.



There was a boon in Erlang usage some 5 years ago that left a sour
taste in many peoples mouths because it was incorrectly used for
problems that both fit the language and those that didn't.



Time is better spent building systems and tools than naming or trying
to ride a wave of 'reactive' or 'async' or whatever else is the fad at
the time.



Sun did a great job with pushing Java into realms it wasn't built for.
I want increased adoption, but for the right reasons.





On Thu, Feb 13, 2014, at 10:22 AM, kraythe . wrote:

Ahh well. I have had my say and stated my opinions more than once. So I
can leave it there. It is, however, definitely food for thought about
the direction I wish to go with my project. Not so much the issue of
OTP as a name but the general impression of "adoption? bah humbug ...
if they don't like it they all suck and we don't care." Sounds like a
disaster of a business decision to me.

Im not so sure its going to be easy to staff or finance a project on a
language that has 1) tools that need work, 2) a limited trained staff
3) a community that cares little about language adoption. It could be
that Erlang becomes another Lisp for me. A language I think rocks but
is entirely impractical in the business world.


Robert Simmons Jr. MSc. - Lead Java Architect @ EA
Author of: Hardcore Java (2003) and Maintainable Java (2012)
LinkedIn: [1]http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39


On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Miles Fidelman
<[2]mfidelman@REDACTED> wrote:

Miles Fidelman wrote:

kraythe . wrote:



I have told you my "green" impressions of OTP and you can dismiss them
if it make you more comfortable but it wont change the fact that others
will have those feelings and many will not get on the list and go
further. They will simply move to Ruby, Scala, Node.js, Clojure, or
something else. If our attitude is "I didn't want you in the community
anyway!" then Erlang will be the next Smalltalk or Lisp. Of academic
and little more than that in significance.





Bah, humbug.  As long as there's a need for industrial strength massive
concurrency, and no serious alternative, it doesn't really matter what
it's called.



Anybody who tries to write a massively concurrent application in Ruby,
Scala, Node.js, Cojure (or Java for that matter), gets what they
deserve.



Just one man's opinion, of course.






  For that matter, what's with this trend toward renaming things - all
  it does is confuse people (think Accenture vs. Anderson Consulting).




--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra

_______________________________________________
erlang-questions mailing list
[3]erlang-questions@REDACTED
[4]http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions


_______________________________________________

erlang-questions mailing list

[5]erlang-questions@REDACTED

[6]http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions

--
Tristan Sloughter
tristan.sloughter@REDACTED

References

1. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-simmons/40/852/a39
2. mailto:mfidelman@REDACTED
3. mailto:erlang-questions@REDACTED
4. http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
5. mailto:erlang-questions@REDACTED
6. http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20140213/4162a8ae/attachment.htm>