Survey finally published etc

tim Rowledge tim at rowledge.org
Tue Jan 24 20:06:37 UTC 2006


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
--
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 disappointments





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list