From: Adam R. <ad...@ex...> - 2010-02-02 13:13:27
|
Not at all - all comments are always welcome :-) I just wanted you to understand that each new feature is something else for the core team to maintain should the contributor then disappear. This can be difficult, especially if the feature is not understood or been discussed. Please do comment in future. Cheers Adam. On 2 February 2010 12:53, Thomas White <tho...@gm...> wrote: > Adam, > > All points you make are both valid and important. I agree it is vital to > know when to listen and when (not) to talk, especially when one > misunderstands completely the context of the conversation. > > Please accept my apologies for butting in. > > Thomas > > On 2 February 2010 09:58, Adam Retter <ad...@ex...> wrote: >> >> On 1 February 2010 19:34, Thomas White <tho...@gm...> wrote: >> > I hope this will be taken in the best possible way. >> > >> > I could never understand why a functionality that is used by some >> > users could be proposed to be removed by other users either who don't >> > use it >> > or don't like it. >> > >> > If something have got a momentum it should stay. It is there, it does >> > not >> > require any additional resources and brings other routes to more >> > solutions. >> >> This is not how good software is built, but more importantly its not >> how it is maintained. We have had plenty of contributions in the past, >> some of excellent quality and some of not. But if we just allowed >> anyone to add anything we would end up with a mess, everyone thinks >> eXist should be something different, at present it is a lot of >> different things to different people - but the core team tries not to >> dilute the product too much. Maintainability is also a huge issue for >> us. Basically we like features to be discussed by the core team. >> >> -- Adam Retter eXist Developer { United Kingdom } ad...@ex... irc://irc.freenode.net/existdb |