No apologies needed. We welcome constructive criticism. I just wanted to put it in context for the rest of the readers of this list.
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Andrew Brust < [email protected]> wrote: > Yes, agreed. Fair point and apologies for not articulating same in my > comment. > > > > > On 7/20/15, 4:10 PM, "Ted Dunning" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Andrew Brust < > >[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> 1. It seems to me like Drill is at a point where, if you thread the > needle > >> perfectly, things generally work as advertised. That’s certainly an > >> advance over the old, old days, where stuff that should have worked > >> sometimes just didn’t. > >> 2. Threading that needle can be super-hard, even for an experienced Java > >> developer. > >> > > > >This is definitely true for the problem of *extending* Drill. > > > >It is much less of a problem for *using* Drill, which is what the team has > >spent much more effort on. See the Drill in 10 minutes article in the > docs. > > > >To my mind, this prioritization is correct. But it shouldn't be exclusive > >either. > > > >This is not to say that user-level fit and finish is done by any means, > >just that people who extend the system will get lots more splinters. >
