Don't use the Camping over there, it's an old version. If you want the newest version clone judofyr/camping, or grab the gem from my gem server (gems.judofyr.net). Camping is very much alive, we,ll just have to clean up the documentation a bit and then we'll release 2.0 (I have access to the RubyForge project).
If anyone wants to help out, just join the mailing list at RubyForge.
I'm glad we have the code; fortunately most of it was in git. (Wasn't it Torvalds who claimed his method of backup was to release his code and let other people mirror it for free?)
But... do we have the writing?
If this is an elaborate practical joke designed to make me really glad that I own a dead-trees version of Nobody Knows Shoes and that I physically printed out a copy of the Poignant Guide... it's working really well.
Also, this isn't the kind of press I'd like to see for github... but, man, is this a clear demonstration of why DVCS rocks.
I love all this _why stuff on the front page (no sarcasm)! Thank you HN!
_why was a truly prolific member of the Ruby community. Assuming he's actually 'gone', he'll be missed and his work appreciated for a long time to come.
Interesting; even though all repositories have been wiped from _why's Github accounts, the hpricot wiki is still alive: http://wiki.github.com/why/hpricot
I hope it stays that way, I wouldn't be able to figure out how to use it just by looking at the method definitions.
As is the wiki for Shoes (http://wiki.github.com/why/shoes)... I don't know if they were forgotten, or this was on purpose to help people who were going to keep the projects alive.
I was thinking about this earlier, actually, when I posted the copy of Potion I had laying around. On the one hand, he released the code open source (MIT license, in the case of Potion), so we completely have the right to do this. Says so right in the license file.
On the other hand, it might be rude. He did take everything down, for whatever reason. If he posted something, anywhere, saying that he didn't want people resurrecting his projects, I'd take down my copy of Potion.
But, I think intent should count for something: I posted a copy of one of _why's projects out of respect. I appreciate everything he's given us, both code and inspiration, and I want to share that with others. I want to teach my friends to code in Shoes, and write chiptunes in Bloopsaphone. From everything he's written, I can only think he'd like that.
We're not resurrecting his work to steal it, but celebrate it.
I believe that _why is the kind to put thought into his licensing decisions. He wrote openly-licensed code (MIT especially) because he didn't want the rights, or the respect, or anything else for the code; he simply wanted to bring forth something good unto the world. I'd be very surprised if, given _why's reappearance, he requested a takedown.
Still, I agree: if he has had a change of heart, we should support whatever the new _why wants, even if it contradicts the old _why; with all he's done for the Ruby community, he's earned the right to be contradictory. Licenses are contracts, and contracts let amoral entities (companies) work together; they aren't needed where fellowship exists.
If anyone wants to help out, just join the mailing list at RubyForge.