← Back to context

Comment by gbjcantab

1 day ago

This looks reasonably interesting, and Evan is extremely thoughtful about design; I know he’s put a huge amount of work into this.

Personally, I’d be very cautious about adopting closed-source software with such a restrictive license as part of an application, especially given the context of Elm’s trajectory. When Elm went through breaking changes or regressions, or was not worked on publicly for years, users had access to the source and the right to modify it. With Acadia’s licensing, you’d be stranded.

On the other hand, with Elm there was no correlation between adoption and funding for development. With Acadia, he's trying a different funding model, so that might mean better support for both Acadia and Elm.

  • The Elm project forked into a bunch of different Elms because Evan basically abandoned / killed it. Then he got more interested with this project. What’s to say that won’t happen again?

    • I think it's fair to say there are other ways to interpret what happened with Elm. What if Evan stopped working on it because he needed to make a living and working on Elm wasn't going to achieve that? In that case, if working on Acadia will earn him a a living, it seems reasonable to believe he will keep working on it.

      4 replies →

    • I would make the larger point that I do not like my software to depend on any software with a bus factor of one that I can't control. Elm had this problem and Acadia has it too.

      3 replies →