From: Stuart Brady <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Simon Cooke wrote: > >>"He might be attempting to make the win32 version better than the others"? > >>SO WHAT? > >Oh no... that's a Microsoft tactic, isn't it, so there /can't/ be >anything wrong with it... Innovation is a good thing. Speaking as a programmer, I know that simply porting programs is very unsatisfying because you're simply twiddling with someone else's work. If I was meant to be doing this in my spare time, I'd want to enjoy it, and I'd probably put a few new things in as well. <snipped OTT fanatical anti-Microsoft rant, which really isn't getting anyone anywhere> >>1. He's still working on it. > >He really should consider releasing the source code whilst he's working >on it, so that the Linux and DOS versions have a chance to catch up. So you're saying that people write bug-free code the first time they write it? Dream on. Surely it's better that he gets everything he's working on working and stable? (building castles on rocks instead of sand, and all that) Get the bugs out of the way now rather than cause problems later. >>2. It's under GPL; therefore it'll be released as source code anyway, so you >>can do a backport if you like. > >If he doesn't release it whilst he's working on it, that will take >longer, and the Win32 version will be better for longer. I also think >that Linux programmers shouldn't go off and improve programs for long >periods of time without releasing the code. They don't, though. See (1). >>3. It's his time and effort. It's up to him how he spends it. As you'll have >>the source, you can spend the time backporting it if you like. > >That's true. I'm not going to argue with that. But he *could* release >the source code after getting the basics done. See (1). >>4. The only person who knows what he's doing on it is Simon himself. > >That's the problem. At least a todo list and some changelogs would be >better than nothing. Not an unreasonable request, although Si's under no obligation to do so. And there's no reason why he shouldn't wait until he's done his bit before doing that either. >>"Then again, Windows programmers are all alike -- they've got no respect for >>other platforms." > >>Sounds like I could say the same about Stuart Brady... no respect for other >>platforms. > >What the hell are you going on about? I've got no respect for MS DOS and >Windows *only* programmers (and that includes myself a few years ago) -- I take it you're not in the programming industry? <snipped more OTT anti-Microsoft ranting> >>Why not just wait and see what happens? > >>Also: the DSK format has NOT been modified. It'll still be the same. There >>will, however, be ANOTHER format that can correctly represent >>protected/non-standard disks. The current format has no concept of sector >>addressing, it doesn't know about different length sectors. So it can handle >>standard disks, and that's it. That's not sufficient. > >Fair enough. > >Btw, I'm /really/ sorry for flaming Si Owen... Aley had just pissed me >off a bit by flaming me directly for "not helping" when I had better >things to do. I'm still a bit annoyed now. So you had a go at Si? Makes sense... >I do, however, urge Si Owen to release the code, no matter how buggy or >incomplete it is. What use is that to any future programmer? It's bloody difficult to develop someone else's alpha code because you don't know if any bugs discovered were as a result of the original programmer's coding or any changes you did after that. Getting Si to complete his bit first before releasing the code will save a LOT of trouble and hassle in future. Besides, say he DID release his code right now. You'd port some of the changes (some of which probably won't be stable at this point). Si then finishes his bit and releases the code. Chances are you'd have to port the same section of code again as it's been changed. Why not wait? Where's the hurry? It's not as if there's a deadline or anything. >I was under the impression that he was waiting until >he'd got the basics working first, but he seems to be well past that >stage, if he's thinking about disk image formats. Have you got any good >reason not to release it, Si? It would make sense for a programming, when porting stuff and making iprovements along the way, to add the improvements when he can, rather than wait until the end of the project. That way, the details of the part of the program which he's improving are still fresh in his memory. So, it's entirely possible that Si's done a few improvements in one part of the program, yet hasn't done the porting in another part of it, making it unreleaseable at this point. You say you're a programmer, Stuart, yet here I am teaching you the very basics of program development... If you just sat down and thought a little before flying off the handle, you'd have a reasonably good guess as to what's really going on. Nick.
