OK, let's go for another lengthy discussion... Warning: lots of personal
stuff in there. But our hero is not killed at the end, don't worry :-)
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Samstag, 14. April 2007 15:23 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Freitag, 13. April 2007 21:38 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Georg Baum wrote:
I don't share your pessimism, especially
if we are to compare current SVN with the state of 1.4.0 when it was
released.
That is not a good comparison. 1.4.0 should not have been released in
that
state, otherwise we would not have users still using 1.3.
Switching or not to 1.4 has *nothing* to do with the stability of
1.4.0.
Yes, not of 1.4.0 anymore, but of current 1.4svn. And that does still
suffer from a too early released 1.4.0. It still has crashes and other
problems like the one with the toolbar, but they can't be fixed without
major surgery which is not advisable in a stable branch.
Problem is that 1.5svn with all its goodies would have never happened if
1.4.0 was not released. I reckon that one year of 1.5 development cured
most of the structure problem of 1.4. If we wait until everything is
fixed, 1.5.0 will never happen.
I agree, also to most points made by André (and in fact I was one of those
who wanted 1.4.0 out). I don't want 1.5.0 to be perfect either. IMO if we
want to be honest to our users we should at least try to make it as good
as 1.3.7. Of course a .0 release will have bugs, but if we don't fix the
regressions before 1.5.0 then I fear that very soon the (still to be
determined) stable branch maintainer is left alone to fix them.
No, he will not be alone, not if we don't branch 1.6 immediately after
1.5.0.
Just look at the traffic on the user list.
There is no such thing as a "lost reputation" in an open source
project.
Of course there is. But you can't see that from the mailing list of a
project, because most people who think it is crap simply ignore it and
use
something else.
And good bye to them. I mean it, there are more and more users everyday.
I don't care about the winning ones, they can use something else if
they can't see the benefit. It's free for all.
I was not talking about whining users, I don't care for them either. I was
talking about users with valid complaints, e.g. users who expect from a
word processor that the scrollbar behaves sensible. Depending on the
document contents the LyX scrollbar behaves very unsensible, so I would
not call complaints about that whining.
On the scrollbar issue, what can I say? I more or less know what needs
to be done but I cannot do that without further cleanup. I'll promise to
do something for 1.5.1 but not now. IMO, we cannot wait forever that you
or I, or Bo, Andre, Michael or JMarc (...) have the time to fix all
remaining issues. IMHO, we cannot afford that or the 1.4.0 saga is going
to be repeated: no development done for a year or so.
(e.g. the separation of frontend -
kernel via the lfun machinery), or doing some 'cleanup'. Now is
definitely
not the time to even think about either of that.
Or political discussions like the place of debug.h. This eats a lot
of
time
with no outcome.
You are free to ignore the message, you are even free to _not_ read
the
messages. I can't understand in which way this is eating your time.
Not mine, but that of others: I was rather thinking of "project time".
So your are big enough to skip the discussions but others are not?
Is it so difficult to understand? If developers actively or passively
participate in discussions concerning some future changes then this costs
time, and this time is not available for bugfixing.
I know that this time would not automatically be available for bugfixing. I
can't force anybody to stop these discussions (and I don't want to do
that), but I thought that a voluntary agreement to concentrate on bug
fixing and leaving other stuff aside would be attractive for developers
and benefical for 1.5.0.
Well, I am an adept of free speak, I just don't agree that this
"self-discipline" is worth it and that the outcome is so great. But this
is of course only my opinion.
My time is mine and I believe that there is some outcome to interested
developers: they actually benefits from the explanations given in
these
discussions. There is a life after 1.5.0.
Sure, but then the current discussions are forgotten, and if you want
to
use some results you have to revive them (because some people who don't
participate now because of the timing would have a strong opinion
later).
That's only what you think. I consider that any discussion is good
independently from the time when it takes place.
Apart from the 'forgotten' bit this is not what I think but a fact. You
cannot dictate what happens in the future by discussing this now without
those who prefer to do bug fixing, and later refer to this past discussion
and forbid those who did not participate to give their arguments.
Come on Georg, do you really think I have a tendency to ignore people's
opinion? Do you really think that I will throw to you some "We already
discussed that so shut up!". If yes, then I can confirm to you that I
will not. AFAIR, I've never ignored your opinion or anyone else opinion
for the matter.
Please Georg, try to restrain yourself from giving lessons. I only
asked
for a list of bugs.
Such is life: You don't always get exactly what you ask for. Don't
worry, I
will not try to convince anybody to share my opinion, but please allow
me
to state it.
That's not my point. My point is that you have a irritating habit of
telling people what they should do or not. I personally don't like this,
I don't tell you what you should do or discuss.
Where did I do that? Certainly not in this thread, here I only described
why I think that 1.5.0 is not as close as you thought, and what my goal
for 1.5.0 would be. I did not tell anybody what they should do, and I did
not give any "moral" lessons either.
Here:
"Another reason is that several people are discussing (and changing)
fundamental design principles of LyX (e.g. the separation of frontend -
kernel via the lfun machinery), or doing some 'cleanup'. Now is
definitely not the time to even think about either of that.
Or political discussions like the place of debug.h. This eats a lot of
time with no outcome."
But if you said that because you feared that I will ignore you when the
time comes then I withdraw my accusation.
I am very sad that LyX goes a way that IMO is not a good one (e.g. file
format changes happen without lyx2lyx change and even without discussion
I don't think that there is no discussion. Even if they happen after the
commit, the discussion happens for all the mentioned items:
(gbrief2), bug ping pong is being played (the math delim stuff, also
without real communication),
Sorry I don't get it, aren't we discussing the matter with Uwe?
rules are ignored at will (José asked for
patches being sent for comments to the list before committing).
Sorry but we cannot wait for Jose to approve all patches. No offence
Jose but you obviously don't have the time to do so.
In the past I have tried to help with issues like this, e.g. by watching
patches for possible file format changes and offering help with lyx2lyx if
needed, but since the majority of developers thinks obviously different
and since I will only have little spare time during the next months I
decided to stop any further work on LyX 1.5svn: I don't want to help with
a release that I cannot endorse.
Your resignation is not accepted! ... Wait, who am I to say this? Hello
Georg, this is just me, Abdel, I am a LyX developer for a year only.
Your opinion is of course more important than mine.
As promised I fixed the \inputencoding bug reported by Dov, I put the
current patch for bug 3043 in bugzilla and when Jean-Marc is back I will
present a solution for the nomencl compatibility problem, but that's it.
BTW Abdel this is nothing personal against you, if you ever come near
Aachen I invite you to a beer (or more).
Don't need to say... I'll invite you for dinner in Paris with JMarc next
time you come to Paris.
Abdel.
