If there are some issues with the implementation a thread should of course be started straight away in TiddlyWikiDev to resolve these. It is only an alpha version after all.
In terms of how TiddlyWiki development works, as far as I'm concerned I raised a ticket for this *3 months* ago on trac: http://trac.tiddlywiki.org/ticket/1286 There was absolutely no discussion on the ticket or issues raised or even a thread on the group disputing it and 3 months seems plenty of time to. I constantly monitor trac tickets and chip in where necessary (albeit this happens very rarely). Also it points out that since there are lot of tickets that go untouched for months/years without any discussion/development these are just noise that distract from other more important issues... as a result maybe this was why this ticket was not noticed. I also maintained backwards compatibility by breaking no tests with my proposed changes and even adding tests to the core to make sure it would continue to be stable. This sounds like a process issue that we need to iron out. Personally I would like to see more tests in TiddlyWiki and more activity on TiddlyWiki tickets driving development - the ticket should be the single thing that drives development in this project. Jon On Mar 18, 7:11 am, FrD <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not a big contributor to the groups (TW and TWdev) but I feel > strongly concerned > with TW. I like this tool and I use it for personal and semi- > professional purposes. > > I was pleased to see there was a new impulse in the TWDev group. > But I was disappointed when I read this thread. > > As Eric I'd like to see a more balanced approach to core development. > And simply put I'd like to have some informations on the new features > that are > proposed for the new versions. > > > > > * How should new TWCore features proposed and refined? e.g., online > > discussions, tickets, conference calls, emails, personal > > conversations, formal RFPs/RFCs (YUCK!), etc. > > I'd prefer some informal discussions on main topics, or important > changes, > here or better on TWDev > > > > > * What criteria are used to evaluate new features? e.g., public > > demand, code complexity/risk, adaptability (plugin potential), > > backward-compatibility, cross-platform compatibility, etc. > > I'm not very concerned with backward compatibility, since I use only > some plugins mainly from tiddlytools and I'm pretty sure Eric will > adapt his work to the new features (?!) > I think public demand through this forum is a good criterium. > > > > And I agree with everything Måns said about "legobricks" :-) > > FrD -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" 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/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
