The way I understand it, you're saying not that we shouldn't be doing it this way (since it isn't centrally managed, it's the only possible way), but that we shouldn't be "bragging" (for lack of a better word) that we have lots of libraries that do a specific thing. Or if not that, then at least that it isn't a clear win.
I agree that from an end-user's perspective it isn't always a clear win, but I do think that having a bunch of libraries (even ones that do the same thing) an indicator of a healthy, active, and enthusiastic community. Sure, it's decentralized and people will often duplicate effort, but different variations on the same idea can also help explore the design space and will reveal to everyone interested what works and what doesn't.
But yeah, if you want to do X and you encounter 15 libraries that do X and can't find a clear consensus on what's best, I can understand why that might be frustrating. I don't think there's really a clear solution to that though, other than gently encouraging collaboration and scoping out of existing work before starting new work. But people generally hate working with other people's code, so I doubt that'll have much of an effect :)
Dan
On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:56 PM, Andrew Coppin
<andrewcoppin@btinternet.com> wrote:
It seems I'm being misunderstood.
Some people seem to hold the opinion that more libraries = better. I'm trying to voice the opinion that there is such a thing as too many libraries. The article I linked to explains part of why this is the case, in a better way than I've been able to phrase it myself.
I'm not trying to say "OMG, the way it is now completely sucks!" I'm not trying to say "you must do X right now!" I'm just trying to put forward an opinion. The opinion that having too many libraries can be a problem, which some people don't seem to agree with. (Obviously it isn't *always* bad, I'm just saying that sometimes it can be.)
That's all I was trying to say.