Niklas Nebel wrote: > Kohei Yoshida wrote: >> On 11/3/06, Mathias Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Let's put it that way: it should be possible to integrate something even >>> if the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached but the result >>> is "good enough". "Good enough" means that we could live with it even if >>> nothing was changed until the release date. This is something you always >>> must take into account, especially in case of community development. >> ... >>> We never should accept unfinished UI work in a way that parts of the >>> necessary functionality *willingly* don't work to a degree that users >>> will expect in a professional application. This can't be described by a >>> fixed percentage but I assume that it can be judged with common sense. >>> If developer, QA and other participants agree that it's good enough, >>> then let's take it. >> >> I like the way you put it. This is essentially what I was trying to >> say in my post. Looks like we're on the same page here. > > But note how "the original goal laid out in the spec wasn't reached" > implies that there was a spec to begin with.
... but of course the same applies to cases where the original goal was described *sufficiently* in an issue or a concept in a wiki page. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
