Hi, * Jörg Fischer wrote (2007-12-29 23:36): >I know about two working "methods": > > - many developers, large user bases. Examples would be Linux, > KDE, Gnome, Mozilla, - there are some more I'm sure. > > - one devoted proficient developer with the required time to > care for the project. Examples would be Vim, MikTeX, perhaps > a few others. > >Now, to which one NEdit belongs to?
Neither. So why do you think there are only these two "methods"?
>The "random way" isn't a preference -- it's a consequence.
I disagree, and not only on philosophical grounds. NEdit's code has a
lot of cruft, to a degree that prevents people to add more features¹.
On top of that, there is one feature, Unicode, which would be called a
severe bug anywhere else. Randomly adding more features makes it less
likely that Unicode is added, by introducing new bugs which must be
fixed or just by making the code more complicated.
Additionally, I think that basic development principles (namely High
Cohesion and Low Coupling) are widely ignored (examples are tabs and
filename_dialog()). If there would be a Roadmap painting a larger
picture there would at least be hope that the developers would code
with that larger picture in mind, making it easier to build on it.
¹ It certainly prevents me from adding cloning, something which I
already did before tabs.
Thorsten Blackmail: Moonpigs
--
If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.
- Sir Isaac Newton
pgpcPw7C7FMn3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- NEdit Develop mailing list - [email protected] http://www.nedit.org/mailman/listinfo/develop
