>> build problems are fixed by developers, not users, sometimes very
>> painfully, and using time that they could spend on other tasks.
>
> If Werner's change breaks the build, surely he'll be the first one
> to argue it's on him to fix it (possibly with help to learn how
> tonfix whatever he doesn't know how to fix), no?
The thing is: Something might happen if I'm not available, for
whatever reasons. It definitely *is* a high maintenance cost if a
single developer is responsible...
> And to what Wols said: I agree completely, it should be _all_ about
> the users, coding is an act of service, not self-gratification. The
> joy comes from making (other) humans happy, not compilers...
I disagree, it is *not* all about the users. There must be a balance
between what the developers want to do or can do, and what the users
expect. Promising stuff to the user, which later on fails due to the
lack of developer resources, is bad.
Werner
