On 8/18/14 11:03 AM, Julien Wajsberg wrote:>
> Just a note that you're all using Nightly here. Nightly is where
> no-transition changes happen, so that we can test new things in the
> wild. And sometimes we disable them after some days, or when it goes
> to aurora, or when it goes to beta.
>
> So, yeah, we used to say to use Nightly for Firefox OS development
> (because this is how we keep up with the changes) but obviously this
> also comes with such disagreements.
>
> To enable/disable webide, you can have a look to about:config, and
> look for the pref "devtools.webide.enabled".
>
> Please report anything that you dislikes about WebIDE by filing bugs,
> before or instead of disabling it. That's basically your duty when
> using Nightly :)
>
> Maybe we should have a separate pref to enable/disable App manager so
> that we can have both side by side? My fear is that users don't use
> WebIDE at all once they disable it...
>
>
> - --
> Julien
On 8/18/14 2:49 PM, Paul Rouget wrote:> Marek Raida wrote:
>> Well, I agree heartily on this. We need ate least some level of
stability, this is too turbulent...
>
> ... stability, in Firefox Nightly?
>
> Please file bugs if WebIDE doesn't meet your requirements.
>
>> Much approach better would be leave AppManager as as - probably add
some hint that from now one try IDE - but remove it sounds bad practice
to me...
>
> You can always access the app manager by loading about:app-manager.
Hey WebIDE and App-Manager developers,
do you really not understand why it was such a bad idea to *replace* the
menu entry for App Manager rather than *add* a new entry for WebIDE?
That our points of view differ so dramatically on this issue suggests a
need to address our differences.
I am having a hard time figuring out your point of view. You are
apparently writing tools for us to use to write great Firefox OS apps
and make the platform kick a**. However, you do not seem focused on our
needs. First, you make a change with little concern for our workflow and
day to day work. Then, when faced with push back like this thread, your
instincts are to answer with self-justification rather than trying to
figure out what the user need actually was and why friction arose.
The transition could have been a delight. You could have announced the
tool, given us access to it, helped us discover and learn to use it and
listened to feedback. All the while we would have been productive with
whichever tool was working for us. Instead, in using a no-transition
approach, you were essentially saying "Hey, it doesn't matter that your
in the middle of something potentially complicated like muddling your
way through derivatives of cartographic projections, today, before you
do anything else, you have to drop everything and learn to use our new
tool just to get your code running on your device." From my point of
view, that lacks respect. REALLY. I did not like it.
The puzzling thing is that your approach was totally, completely,
absolutely unnecessary. Had it been neccessary, and accompanied by an
'Sorry folks but we are having to do a no-transition upgrade on the app
tool that will land next week. Find out more ...' one could have
understood. But it turns out it was totally unnecessary and it caused a
few hours of confusion, angst, failed reversion attempts and pain until
I re-discovered the magic 'about:app-manager' URL.
So, you all need to decide on your priority: is it writing your tool or
helping Firefox OS developers get work done? From that decision, lots
will follow naturally.
Okay, I'm tired of this thread but to clear up some issues.
NO ONE IS ASKING YOU TO KEEP WORKING ON APP-MANAGER, to fix its bugs, to
not build WebIDE. We all expect you have great reasons for your start
from scratch approach to the tool. Great, go for it. I look forwards to
using it when it is stable and noticeably better than App-Manager. Also,
we are all enthusiasts and will move to WebIDE sooner rather than later;
Julien's 'fear' seems groundless to me.
Asking us to file bugs is fine; using it as an excuse for your
no-transition is bullshit. We file bugs (though given the lack of follow
up on Mozilla's end, that is starting to suck too). I just spent an hour
trying to isolote and file a bug in Nightly's handling of canvas size.
I'll get around to filing bugs on WebIDE someday, but not today, I have
work to get through. Okay? And please, never ask me to drop everything
to use a tool that will probably break and file bugs when I have my own
work to do.
Nightly if we are going to be productive using it, can not be a 'Mozilla
does whatever the fuck it wants'. Nightly, first and foremost is the
latest browser code. That's how we get bug fixes for browser issues,
maybe even issues we have just filed. So your developer tools in nightly
should play nice with letting me reliably and safely use the latest
browser code. Yes, per the shared understanding of Nightlies, you are
*allowed* to do no-transition changes on Nightly. But why, unless it is
strictly necessary, would you? Do you not appreciate any of the issues
such transitions cause? And if ever you decide to do such a change,
given their cost, it probably makes sense to do a lot of coordination
around them, not just amongst yourselves but with your users as well.
So. Thanks for the new tool and I look forwards to using it someday.
Congratulations on all the hard work it took to get here. Sorry that we
didn't manage a more graceful transition.
cheers,
~adrian
_______________________________________________
dev-b2g mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
