Survey finally published etc
karl.ramberg at chello.se
Tue Jan 24 20:27:14 UTC 2006
tim Rowledge skrev:
> On 24-Jan-06, at 11:22 AM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> Now, from my point of view, my motivations are simple: Technically, I
>> need a robust basis for the work going on in Tweak/Croquet. The
>> smaller the basis the better because it limits maintenance efforts.
>> If you look at the work I do for the community you'll find that there
>> is an obvious overlap of interests: ToolBuilder, Graphics, FFI,
>> Compression are all core technologies that we use heavily in our
>> projects and where it makes perfect sense to put some work in.
>> In the larger picture, because of the dependency on other parts of
>> the system, I am in the conservative camp - changes are generally bad
>> since we have no control and little influence on what precisely
>> happens where (just two days ago I got reminded again how small that
>> influence is in practice). You should therefore be prepared that if I
>> comment on such issues that I'll raise the conservative voice - this
>> is part of my responsibility to the other projects I'm in.
> Here you are expressing the major problem in a group project-
> - You want everything else to stay the same so your massive changes
> can go ahead.
> - So does everyone else doing any work!
> We simply can't make any useful progress under such conditions.
> Forward progress causes breakage and it costs much effort to provide
> invisible mogration support. Spending time on that prevents forward
> progress - and puts people off ever bothering.
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> If you never try anything new, you'll miss out on many of life's great
More information about the Squeak-dev