[theforum] Decision time - please cast your vote beforenoonSaturday Nov 20th (12.00GMT)

aardvark evolt at roselli.org
Thu Nov 18 15:48:43 CST 2004

Morgan Kelsey wrote:
> martin, when reading back that thread it appears to be a conversation 
> you had mostly with yourself. there was no vote on what functionality we 
> can "live without", and there is still no definition of what those 
> functions are. i think a lot of us are a little nervous about a "we

i have to agree with morgan here... regardless of how the vote goes, we 
really don't have a defined features list (that i could find, which may 
be my fault for being so distant)... without that, what have we got as 
our scope? how can we define our deliverable or when it's complete? how 
can we tell if we're failing before our *members* have to tell us?

> as the aardvark pointed out, the last 10% of a job is the biggest, most 
> draggiest, most pain-in-the-hiney part.

and i fear we may dump some features, perhaps without realizing it, if 
we don't have a discrete list... because in that last 10% we may run 
into limitations we had not expected...

> it also seems to me, that the majority of the core developers of the 
> last rewrite (those that are still around, and i could be wrong) don't 
> want to see any functionality or quality lost.

i completely agree... as opposed to agreeing just a bit...

>> Yes there's tweaking to be done. But think of a few things:
>> 1) The majority of existing functionality was put together in a few
>> weekends. We have 4 weeks. The hard bits are done.

without being one of the developers on this, and without seeing the 
features list, how do we know the hard bits are done? yes, that is 
rhetorical, but it's still very hard to qualify that right now...

  > maybe the elder folks can form some type of a type of council that
> signs off on the new work in some way....(just an idea)

ummm... i won't sign off until it makes me belgian waffles...

with fresh fruit...

>> 4) Redesigning in public is fun, exposing the process - are we really
>> saying we're so much better than Zeldman who does so regularly?
> nope, and not a valid comparison.


> out-of-whack. i think it may be a disservice to those who have developed 
> for evolt in the past to take a flippant attitude at this point. and yes

it does feel flippant... although i know everyone is trying very hard 
not to make it so... i'm happy to see so much momentum... i fear i may 
be affecting that momentum here when i really just want to help everyone 
direct it... and yet i speak anyway...

ok, in re-reading this, i know nothing said here would preclude a vote, 
but i have to admit, without a discrete features list, it's kinda hard 
to know if the technology really fits the needs... we really *are* 
risking putting the cart before the horse...

perhaps we can author a wiki page so everyone can add the features they 
know (since there are surely some i don't use) and use that as our base 

then we can have a scope/spec from which to work...

More information about the theforum mailing list