On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Evan Daniel <evanbd at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Starting work and asking for input was precisely what I did in the email > > that started this entire thread. > > My impression from later messages in the thread was that when people > had comments, you tended to overrule them or dismiss them. I really wish, rather than critiquing my tone, you would respond to the specific arguments I've made in favor of a fresh start with the UI. All I've done is made a proposal, and defended it when people have made comments I don't agree with. That isn't overruling or dismissing, its called "discussing", and its exactly what we should be doing. > I don't think this would be so much of a problem, except it sounds like you > expect other people to help write code while telling them you plan to > throw out what they've been working on already. Firstly, all I've done is made a proposal, and defended that proposal, I'm not dictating anything to anyone. The reality however is that FProxy is a mess. We've basically implemented our own web framework, and it violates almost every rule of good web framework design. We've got HTML structures implemented in Java code, and no convenient support for AJAX, among other flaws. If you disagree with this observation then say so, and let's debate it. But if you accept that FProxy has serious and fundamental flaws, then it makes perfect sense to replace it with a pre-existing open source web framework that has elegantly solved all of these problems. GWT is the best candidate for this I've found. I know a lot of work has gone into FProxy, but that fact alone cannot prevent us from considering the pros and cons of replacing it. We've thrown out a lot of code over the years with Freenet, its an essential part of software development. Regardless, nothing will get thrown out any time soon, we'll be lucky if we get a new UI for Freenet 0.9. For example, there's > been a significant amount of UI work and discussion of same on > Freetalk -- why are you announcing that "the plan" (which isn't so > much "the plan" as "your plan" at present, afaics) involves throwing > all that out and starting over, rather than participating in that > discussion? > This isn't "the plan", this is "a plan" that I'm seeking feedback on. I think there's a big difference between saying "here's what I've > done, what do you think?" and "here's what I've done, and what I > expect everyone else to do in the future, what do you think?" even > when the amount of prior input from other people is the same. > Its not what I expect people to do, its what the plan requires *if* people accept it. Would you prefer that I pretend that replacing the UI required nobody to do anything? > > I've suggested that she join in, but she isn't a huge fan of the > > rough-and-tumble of Freenet's mailing lists. Hopefully she will. > > Ian. > > To be really blunt (and yes, I realize that's probably part of the > problem), I suggest that you should work on fixing that problem rather > than avoiding it. I won't pretend to know how to go about doing that > (hopefully you have some ideas?), but I think it would help if you > lead by example. I haven't been criticizing what you're trying to do, > and personally I don't have much of an issue with how you've done it. > What I've been trying to say is that it looks to me like you ruffled > some feathers, as an outside observer who's mostly neutral, I think I > can make a decent guess as to why. > All I've done is proposed that we improve our UI, made an argument for why doing this properly requires replacing fproxy's current infrastructure, and argued that GWT is the best candidate for a replacement web framework. The reality is that FProxy is a mess, we've basically implemented our own web framework, and its not a good one. We have HTML constructs embedded directly in code, which is always a bad idea. Sooner or later our web interface needs a reboot to address these architectural deficiencies, and I don't think there is any advantage to pretending that this isn't the case. And I'm serious about wanting to hear your wife's words directly. It > would be helpful to be able to distinguish your ideas and opinions > from hers. I don't think she has any interest in discussing anything other than feedback on the proposed redesign. Certainly she has absolutely no interest in getting involved in a meta-debate like this one. I'll try to persuade her to chime in, but if you actually had specific questions for her it may help. Ian. -- Ian Clarke CEO, SenseArray Email: ian at sensearray.com Ph: +1 512 422 3588 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20100211/f5bcfee3/attachment.html>
