On 3/29/07, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, I've heard the same thing, but I'm wondering if we can do better than that by going open sooner. You know, very often the biggest mistakes are made at the very beginning. If we can solicit the collective intelligence of a wider group perhaps the basic design will be better.
I think there's at least one good practical reason to avoid doing that, or at least to do it at arm's length in a "potential users discussing potential features" mailing list rather than "here's our code as we write it". In the early stages of something as bleeding-edge as this, it's normal to need several rounds of scrapping and redoing major chunks of design; if you don't/can't do that, if you have to go with whatever your first guess was, it's easy to end up hamstrung later because the design doesn't really handle the requirements and it's too late to rewrite from scratch. It's psychologically a lot easier to do that sort of scrap-and-redo if the world isn't looking over your shoulder. One thing we can try is to build an extremely primitive prototype so it can
be out as soon as possible.
That I agree with, aim to get something that works but doesn't yet have all the bells and whistles, so it can be released soon. ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
