I hear you loud and clear, honest. I also wish we had better versioning support (yes, the loader supports it, but did you check to see how many of the Google API really do support large number of old versions? I think you'll find that it's very few, if any). There are difficulties in getting there, but we hope to improve this area in the future. I know I personally do.
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Bill Kuker <[email protected]> wrote: > VizGuy once said: > > "We are working hard to make sure that we do not break the > functionality of the charts. > We plan to change the version only if we will intentionally change the > behavior of the library, not on every enhancement or addition." > > > > And beleive me, I work hard too: > > I work hard to read the documentation and use the library only as > intended and supported. I work hard to not use any undocumented > features and I work hard not to rely on any bugs. I work hard to check > my applications against the release candidates and I work very hard to > get any problems fixed before the release. > > > > I wish I were perfect: > > I wish I had never unintentially taken advantage of a bug in a > library. Heck, I wish I had never had to stoop so low as to > intentionally take advantage of a bug in a library to get something > done. I wish I had all the time in the world to read the documentation > and make sure I had everything right. > > > > I wish the Viz team were perfect: > > Yeah, I wish there were never a bug, not even a bug that would allow a > Date column when the documentation clearly says String only. Yeah, > accepting a Date on the library side is as much a bug as me sending it > is. Honestly though I would rather they kept making additions and > improvements to an AWSOME library rather than spend 99% of their time > checking that inputs conform to the documentation. > > > > Pobody's Nerfect: > > The current versioning scheme is predecated on perfection from both > parties, and even if I were so generous as to grant VizGuy perfection > I would never make such a claim for myself. Having read a great number > of questions on this list I don't think I'd make that claim for any of > my fellow Viz API users. We've known since before the first punch card > that programmers are imperfect at best, and reckless, documentation > ignoring, integration test skipping maniacs at worst. > > > > Please use Versions: > > Yeah I messed up. I admit it, the documetation was clear. I didn't > read that part. Still, a graph came out. A nice graph. I liked that > graph. My Boss liked that graph, QA liked that graph and my Customer > liked that graph. That version of the library got the job done and we > love it, warts and all. Please let it keep working. > > When I upgrade to the new version my graph will break. I'll complain. > I'll read the documentation. I'll apologize. I'll fix my code so it > works with the new version. Nobody's perfect. > > > -Bill > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Google Visualization API" 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-visualization-api?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Visualization API" 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-visualization-api?hl=en.
