What he said... (feeling unorigional.. :-)) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Pemberton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 5:08 AM Subject: Re: [Dynapi-Dev] Suggestions and questions
> Looks interesting... > > I know I seem to be spending too much time bitching, I just find it hard > to understand why all this time and effort has been put into making a > system that is causing features to become unable to be implemeneted and > also create additional overhead. > > Especially since they are being spoken about at the same time as > changing "DynAPI" to "dynapi". It seems that the theory of > simplification is being overlooked in the process of building a utopian > loader that has already been started and is too far down the track to be > changed. It also looks like we are almost falling back into the old > trap of the structure changing faster than we can adjust our code. > > Too many changes are being implemented without any consultation. It is > getting to the point where we need to see some of the code before we > should be forced into making these changes. Just as we did with the > DynAPIX phase, I see little reason why we should not have access to the > code that you are basing your work on. It is a little hard to make > comments / give feedback on a structure / syntax sight unseen. > > I apologise if these comments sound a bit extreme, but as I we have > already gone through the process of structure redesign as various > points, I don't really see why this one should be done from such a > removed position. It is as if you are saying that we are not going to > be able to comprehend your new work unless we have our hand held. If it > is simply a risk of being overwhelmed with questions, I am not sure that > this is the best way to go about it. > _______________________________________________ Dynapi-Dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
