I'm only one guy, but... For one thing, it would be nice if everyone involved took a step back, breathed deeply, and remembered that this stuff isn't all there is to life. Relax. Smell the flowers. Sneeze.
For another... I think it's important in the context of the dispatcher discussion to note that it's post-1.3, and as such, I don't think it warrants all the heat. I think personally it's a great idea, and I'd jump on it in a second based on my understanding of it, but I think everyone's looking at it saying "We don't want to do it right now." Wrong timeframe. For yet another... I've brought this up before, but from my new position as "NOT the most angry, rantingest, annoyed developer in webwork-land" I'd like to see WebWork's "attitude" as a project modified slightly. I've seen arguments against new (more orthogonal) functionality such as Anders Hovmoller's (sorry, I don't have a .se keyset) property realignment shot down because of momentum and/or code bloat... well, both of these arguments are retarded, if you'll pardon the insult to the less intelligent everywhere. WebWork already is bloated, that milk is spilled already. Adding more code bloat should be minimized if possible, but let's be real: This is Java, it's not like a little more is gonna be noticed. The momentum issue is not very bright either: one could argue that 1.2, bug-compatible and everything, *is* the momentum, and fixing bugs runs counter to maintaining that momentum. We've seen users take points on the list and say, "Hey, yeah, I hated it when you did that," and "We'd like this feature," paraphrased... and occasionally there's a concession. That's not really very fan-friendly. While I realise WebWork isn't out for market share or fans, I think it'd be nice to have THIS framework be well-known if only because I think it's a best-of-breed so far... and not being users-friendly (as in, friendly to the users you've got) is not the way to be. When users take the time to speak up, we need - as a whole - to be seen as competent, cooperative, understanding, patient. This dismissive "You can't do that because we think that's wrong" isn't the way to go. If <ww:property /> is, in fact, perfection in tags, then SAY WHY. "It's always been that way" and "it works for us" isn't why. if <ui:hidden /> is out of scope, SAY WHY. "We didn't think it was necessary" isn't why. If you think a lot of extra power at the cost of maybe 30 lines of code isn't good, SAY WHY. "We don't see the point of providing the extra power" isn't why. Come on, guys, let's work as a team. --------------------------------------------------------- Joseph B. Ottinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://enigmastation.com IT Consultant ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: See the NEW Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0001en _______________________________________________ Opensymphony-webwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
