Am 13.03.2011 um 01:33 schrieb Christopher Forsythe: > The only argument that matters is what people are willing to do with their > free time, and what they like to do with their free time.
Very, very wrong. That can never be the one and only principle. If everybody just did what they wanted, we'd probably never get close to a release. In fact, that's where I think one of Adium's major problems lies: in the past, too few of Adium's developers felt responsible for keeping Trunk half stable and for getting it ready for release The huge user base we have entails a certain responsibility. We shouldn't lie and still maintain we are just doing this for ourselves (and our girlfriends). > I once convinced a developer to work on a feature that nobody wanted to work > on. He did it, but that was the end of his work on Adium. I do not believe he > enjoyed working on this feature at all, and I fully believe that this is the > main reason he quit working on Adium. Adium was no longer fun. That's a very extreme example of making a developer do something he doesn't want to. It was irresponsible of you, I agree. > Most technical problems have been covered in Adium. What is left is v/v, > reshuffling preferences, and UI/UX. <snip> To me, that argument rather questions the point that we need all of Snow Leopard's new features such as code blocks. > I do not agree with you that 1.5 will come out before 10.7, but let's say > that you are right. You would only be right by months. If you consider all > previous beta periods after 1.0, you're still looking at somewhere around > October if Adium is put into alpha/beta cycles even as late as June. The development of Adium 1.0 and to lesser extent the releases since work as a cautionary tale. It should be our goal to improve this situation and with the new developers we have gained I hope we can do better. > So instead of providing new, fun, compelling features for the Developers to > work with, you want to hold them back out of what exactly? The only thing I > can see here is that you feel bad for some users, and that's it really. Yes, at least 25% of our users. > I don't see anything else that makes sense. Sure, the meeting notes said > everyone agreed. But the meeting notes were before xcode 4 came out, and > before this email thread. This email thread is a proposal to change that. Little has changed since. Back then, we knew about when 10.7 would be released. Xcode being released around now shouldn't come as such a huge surprise, either. > Plus you would be relegating all 1.5.x releases to also support 10.5. Which > means that xcode 3.x has to stick around that much longer. So say 1.6 comes > out next year in March, your proposal would force at least one person to keep > 3.x around in order to build Adium. > > Now is a good time to split off from 10.5. Like a few others have said, > blocks is a large improvement, which simply cannot be used when supporting > 10.5 and xcode 3.x. "What is left is v/v, reshuffling preferences, and UI/UX." and we need blocks? What does it allow us to do that justifies keeping at least 25% of our users from using the greatest and latest version of Adium? As it has been already said, Xcode 4 supports building for 10.5. Xcode 4 is also buggy. > I think it cannot be stressed enough about how bad an idea this is in a > resource deprived scenario. You are proposing a large misuse of resources > here, and don't have anything really compelling other than "but we said we'd > do it in a meeting!" and "it's in this policy!". I think you really should > look at what you are proposing here Robert, I don't think it's right to the > people writing the code to force them to do what they don't want to do here. I'm sorry, opportunism was never my thing. > Chris Robbie
