Frederik Ramm schrieb: > >> I don't see that NG or NG-2 would fly at this point. > > I don't see why not.
Well, I hope you actually *do* see the point - as I know personally that you're really not an ignorant :-) I'm astonished why everybody is so eager about > fussing around with a piece of software they think has the crappiest > design ever when they could instead contribute to a clean, new approach. Well, it's not about the "crappiest design ever" vs. the "clean room approach". In reality it's the question between taking current JOSM into a way to be more maintainable IMHO (but that's obviously discussable). Any I've spend some time with the JOSM sources ... I mean, JOSM is implemented in JAVA, so there will be a certain kind of developers interested in improving JOSM - which usually has JAVA experience. Simply ignoring how JAVA is usually implemented is probably not the best way to threat things here. > I'd rather have those people who are comfortable with the way JOSM is > written work with JOSM, and those who are not work with JOSM-NG, and I > have no doubt that if you'd invest in JOSM-NG the same time you're > willing to spent refactoring JOSM, then JOSM-NG would indeed fly. The > sheer rendering performance would make many people want to switch. > Frederik, by simply ignoring the obvious demands of many of the interested developers, IMHO you're simply doing a bad job in maintaining JOSM :-( If there is great demand from the community (and there obviously is), you as a project develop lead shouldn't simply say "I don't like it ..." - so we don't do it. I mean, instead of simply saying "I don't like it", wouldn't it be better to encourage people to focus their work to do minor steps to improve things? Again, I mean, if you wouldn't categorically refuse changes to the overall JOSM design, where *could* the JOSM architecture already be today? Regards, Ulfl _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list josm-dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev