On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 03:38:23PM -0500, Mark Woodward wrote: > Maybe I'm too used to working in engineering groups. I am trying to get > input for a project. Trying to iron out what the feature set should be and > the objectives that should be attained. BEFORE I start coding.
Well yes, the problem is that what's been suggested so far doesn't provide much to give feedback on. It needs to be much more worked out. > Just saying "submit a patch" is the antithesis to good engineering, it > works for hacking, but if I am going to develop a feature, I wish to do it > right and have it appeal to the broadest possible audience, collect as > much input about the needs of users, etc. That works, but only as long as it's something a lot of people care about. This isn't, so until you (or somebody) comes up with a fairly complete proposal as to how it should interact with the rest of the system, it's hard to get/give feedback. Sorry, that's the way it works sometimes. > Maybe it is that the whiteboard engineering discussion process doesn't > translate well to this medium. Yep. the turnaround time is so high and the amount of communication so low that you pretty much have to submit huge chunks at a time to get any meaningful work done. The quick turnaround you get on a whiteboard simply doesn't exist. Don't take it personally. One effect of this system is the "first-mover advantage". The first person to implement gets the biggest say in the final result. Have a ncie day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <kleptog@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/ > Patent. n. Genius is 5% inspiration and 95% perspiration. A patent is a > tool for doing 5% of the work and then sitting around waiting for someone > else to do the other 95% so you can sue them.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
