Subject: Topic: Just Works and 1.0
From: Paul Rohr (paul@abisource.com)
Date: Thu May 03 2001 - 18:32:15 CDT
I've been banging the Just Works drum for so long that I'm never sure
whether I've inspired people, or just deafened them.
I assume that we all agree that a feature Just Works when anyone who's used
more than one modern word processor tries out that feature and can't find
*anything* wrong with it. They start out using AbiWord with the expectation
that feature X would work a certain way, and, by gum, that's *exactly* how
that feature works in AbiWord. No surprises, no gotchas, no little niggling
details that don't quite feel right. It Just Works.
Nothing new there, right? We all know that this is a fiendishly difficult
goal, but we strive for it anyway. So what does this have to do with 1.0?
Why did Paul start a new topic? Does he ever stop typing?
Well, I've noticed that a number of the arguments being made about other 1.0
topics seem to imply that people may have different answers to the following
philosophical question.
We're trying to decide which features to include in our 1.0 release, our
first "final", stable binary release -- not a binary or a prerelease, but
the Real McCoy. That release, we all assume, can and should get a ton of
attention from people who like stable software.
If we know that we're working on a feature which won't Just Work (and for
every release, there's always at least one of those), which situation do you
think most users would rather have?
A. "Ship it" ... Include the feature, even though it only half-works.
B. "Next release" ... Leave it out, and release it when it Just Works.
C. "Stall" ... Hold this release indefinitely, until it Just Works.
That's the $64,000 question -- A or B or C? With arguments, if you please.
:-)
Paul
PS: My answer should already be obvious, so I'll hold off giving it until
everyone else has anted up.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat May 26 2001 - 03:51:01 CDT