On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:10, Dexter wrote: > No offense, Wolfgang, but you don't seem to appreciate the gravity of your > statement.
No, I don't. > Also, I'm not implying end users should be beta testers, just that beta > testers shouldn't be required to be programmers too. Good, at least we see eye to eye on this! (...) > There are two kinds of "features" involved. Both need to be handled > differently. Soft features, which provide a functionality, API or > interface for an application to use ina consistent manner, are very much > the business of the maintainer and at the heart of what he is doing - it > is through keeping these consistent that he ensures compatibility. Again, I agree completely. > Hard features, which may require changes to the OS to make different > hardware look alike to the OS and applications, are much harder for the > maintainer to handle. He a) has to have a sample of the hardware, and b) > has to have an in-depth knowledge of what changes were necessary to make > it happen. Think of the implications. Does the maintainer buy the > hardware, or is the developer required to give/loan a prototype to them? This is where the idea of "key developers" comes in. I can delegate those tasks to them! > *shudders* same here. > I don't think I'm going to devil's advocate that particular quandry any > more - it's just getting too frightening persuing the ramifications... No, I can use all the help I can get so that we can hammer something out! Wolfgang
