On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 4:01 PM Chris Albertson <albertson.ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Start writing code" is the exact WRONG way to start the software project. > In fact, it is a classically wrong way that is common with beginners. > Every software management book written in the last few decades starts out > showing all the common mistakes and this is #1 on the list. > > The best analogy is to building a house. The beginners say "why not just > buy some lumber and start work, everything knows what house looks like. > He gets halfway done and someone tells him the foundation is wrong. So he > fixes that. Then even worse after the house is done they tell him the > floor plan is wrong and it needs to be a single floor because the elderly > owners can't walk upstairs. So much software is done this way that it is > the #1 reason why projects fail. > > The correct way is to spend considerable time upfront looking at what the > customer really needs, not what he says he needs. Then you might do some > prototypes to mock-ups and show them around to get feedback and more > ideas. You can do this a few times. Finally, you can get into > high-level design, figure out what the major parts will be and how the > parts interact. > > Next, I'd do prototype work and verify some of the harder parts can even be > done. > > Finally, you get to detailed design stage, do that, show it around and get > more input. > > Now you are ready to start writing code. > > But why bother when most LinuxCNC users are happy with what they have? > Most DOS users were happy with the DOS command line. But there were few > DOS users. It is kind os self fulfilling, those not happy with the way > LinuxCNC works never become LinuxCNC users. > > > Look what Tormach did. There target customer base was NOT LinuxCNC users. > They went after a larger group of potential costomers > > So this email list is actually a very poor place to get ideas, A better > place is to find where the hordes of machinests who looked at LinuxCNC and > said "not for me" and moved on. What were THOSE guys looking for? > My background is computer science, and I worked as a system and network admin for the Naval Research Lab in DC for almost 30 years. I know what's involved in very large projects for satellite systems as well as a bunch of other classified military systems. I know what is involved in complex software and building a system that meets the requirement for very complex requirements. Don't need a lecture from you on that. Bringing up DOS users is a straw man argument number one. Number two, the number of users of Unix and Linux systems vastly outnumber the folks that used DOS, and Unix and Linux software are still widely used even today. Can't say the same about DOS users. You do realize that Tormach Path Pilot is really nothing more than a different front end to LinuxCNC, right? What were those folks looking for that decided they didn't want LinuxCNC? Dunno, why don't you ask them, then design them a system they would like? All I see hear is the same people throwing out the same ideas for a system that is _not_ LinuxCNC. Like I said before, instead of complaining the system you seem to want doesn't exist, take the bull by the horns and design and code that system. Then you'll have the bully pulpit in your own kingdom of CNC users who would like and want your software. Completely redesigning a working system to satisfy a small number of people who might or would like something different I'm sure is not something the developers of this great software would consider. So,like I said before, fork off to a new branch, do your design work, write your code and rule the CNC world. Don't expect somebody else to do your work for the things you want. You want it, you make it happen. Mark _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
