Alternatively, you could spend time polishing your project and its surrounding in private with your own SVN server. When you finally deem it ready, you can create a new project and sync/import it into your Google Code project.
Still, that seems to run contrary to how I perceive open source projects to function. A project's full development history should always be visible, even if mistakes are made along the way. As long as a project is published, it brings the opportunity for others to contribute -- someone might wind up helping you finish the initial release and could give you valuable insight into usage patterns or design flaws. Furthermore, what happens after the "provisionary time" when you start to move into post-1.0 development? If you are doing public development, you will need to incorporate changes over time. This means that you will always have some unfinished or untested code out in the open. A common technique for dealing with unfinished code is to keep several branches in your repository for development and stable work. When something is ready to release, tag it, then create a download for public consumption. The individuals looking for a stable release will grab the binary, while the adventurous will compile from the development or stable branches. To address people ignoring the in-progress project, it might be beneficial to put down a project roadmap with actual dates and features on it. Give an estimate for the next or initial release on the homepage as well. This will let potential users know when to check back instead of wander off indefinitely. On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Scott Kirkwood <[email protected]>wrote: > > You could publish a version one that is an empty site while you work > on version two. > When version two is 'ready' you can make that the active version. > Does that make sense? > > On 10/30/09, Ben Collins-Sussman <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Bao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> Thanks for your quick reply. > >> > >> I just want to know if google-code has that feature. If it is > >> intentionally design like that, I have no problem! > >> > > > > We do not have that feature, and do not plan to add such a feature. > > > > > > > >> What a man will really > >> react if he is seeking for something and hitting my project and he > >> sees a half of the introduction written, no source code committed yet? > >> He would think, grrrr, a gain a garbage project created for fun and > >> never come back. > >> > > > > Or, if you choose not to create a project at all (and work only on your > own > > computer), then this man will never even know your interest/intent exists > > at > > all. He may decide to go implement the same idea himself. Isn't it > better > > to put up an introduction that says "this code is still not finished, > > please > > join the mailing list to discuss and help out?" The goal is to *attract > > contributors*, not work alone until your project has something great to > > show. Contributors can join at any point, even in the earliest stages. > > > > > > > > > >> I even now cannot manage to > >> commit source codes, it just simple fails to authenticate from my > >> Eclipse! > > > > > > My guess is that you didn't checkout a working copy over https://, which > is > > required for commits. http:// will not work, you need https://. Also > > remember to use your googlecode password, not your 'google account' > > password. > > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hosting at Google Code" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-code-hosting?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
