I'm glad for Donna Dinberg's post, as it crystallizes my overnight thinking about code4lib and its currently-vaporware journal. This message may turn long and discursive, for which I apologize in advance. Code4lib started out as and in many ways still *is* a core group of library tech people, a group with history, in-jokes, and its own fiery small-group energy. Roughly half of what I see in this discussion boils down to a desire for code4lib to continue and expand upon its achievements, while essentially remaining a self-contained group. (Certainly a group that welcomes new members -- but still, a self-contained and self-defined group of people.) *If that is the desire*, then code4lib.org should fulfill the necessary communication functions admirably. I will go further: if that is the desire, a journal of any stripe is useless and may be actively detrimental. A journal (whatever its pretensions) *isn't really for* the members of an in-group. It's the in-group's vehicle for reaching outside itself. And that's what I see in the other half of this discussion, which turns upon broadening code4lib into a larger phenomenon within the library (and tech? not sure) world. This has implications for the small group. Like it or not, a small group that wants to become a movement within a larger one has to analyze, consider, and play to the larger group's ways of thinking, behaving, and communicating. Inevitably, this means some loss to the small-group culture; in-jokes don't scale. A couple of bumps and bruises that happened on the way to code4libcon suggest the kind of outer-directedness and circumspection that code4lib does not yet have, but *will need* if it is to speak out to the larger professions (both software development and librarianship, but librarianship especially). It also means that Muhammad will have to go talk to the mountain. In librarianship terms, that means conferences (which code4lib has already pulled off), and a journal or something very like it. For all the violent "Library 2.0" handwaving, the bulk of my work colleagues barely tolerate listservs, do not read blogs, think wikis are weird, and are afraid to tinker with their software preferences. Journals they understand. Journals have ISSNs, can be catalogued and routed and indexed. Journals have stability (both actual and semiotic) that blogs often lack. Journals are an accepted library communications medium. Now, code4lib's core is, shall I say, hardcore. Real Developers. Definitely we don't want to lose that in a welter of shiny new IM toys and the latest hot end-user out-of-the-box app. Code4lib does not want to become Computers in Libraries, in other words. Nor, I'm fairly sure, does it want to go the ITAL/JASIST "whee! theory!" route. Nor does it have an exclusive focus on "digital libraries" -- it's broader than that, it's about code in libraries *wherever code happens*, and code happens all over the place in today's libraries. I agree that quite a bit of code4lib's ordinary output (on the channel and on member blogs) deserves wider dissemination in the library world. The question then becomes "which parts of the library world need to listen?" Donna's post suggests a criminally underserved population, one I think code4lib could profitably target along with its developer core: the "accidental" library tech. We are not developers. We have extremely limited formal training in computers when we have any at all. We tend to have pretty good technical aptitude, we may have one or two areas of genuine technical expertise, and we can talk to Real Developers without (often) sounding like idiots... but we rely on others to do the major-league coding and to haul us out of the fire when we break something. Some of us do grow up to be Real Developers, though, and I believe it behooves code4lib to think about how to make that happen more often. Barring Rachel Singer Gordon's excellent book, there is NOTHING out there for us. Nothing. ITAL and JASIST are too divorced from daily library practice and problems (aside from the occasional ITAL squib with a good hack in it). Computers in Libraries (both mag and conference) is too fluffy, and doesn't usually put us in touch with the Real Developers who can and are willing to lend us a hand. Library Hi-Tech is pretty good, but still not quite right (and not OA, either). Blogs are great, and we both read and write blogs, but blogs have limits, and aren't smiled upon by our managers and retention/promotion committees. We *do not have* a library-blessed communications organ. I frankly don't think such an organ needs to be peer-reviewed, even considering retention/promotion concerns, because enough of an aura clings to techie stuff in librarianship that nobody cares that D-Lib and Ariadne aren't; a publication in either one is still going to impress the committee. So. Summary. Code4lib needs to decide if its communications goals are internally or externally focused. If internally, then code4lib.org should continue pretty much as is. If externally, code4lib then needs to identify the populations it wishes to communicate to, and present those communications in a fashion acceptable to the larger world. Accidental sysadmins are an underserved population that code4lib could intelligently and profitably target. Ite, missa est. Dorothea