Tim Churches wrote: > Richard Hosking wrote: > >> I reckon get *something* going as an OSS program without worrying too >> much about the design. Make sure it is easily extensible and then >> improve it later as there is takeup. >> > > I'm not sure that one can have the latter (easily extensible) without > the former (worrying too much about the design). > > However, it is certainly possible to do quick-and-dirty systems and then > discard them, treating each iteration as a more advanced prototype than > the last - but it takes a certain dispassionate ruthlessness to toss > hard work in the rubbish bin after extracting the useful lessons from it. >
Haven't been to the movies yet, Tim? http://blog.scribestudio.com/articles/2006/07/03/martin-fowler-railsconf-2006-keynote-address http://bloggingrailsconf.com/articles/2006/06/23/martin-fowler-keynote David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
