On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 11:00 PM, Adam Murdoch
<[email protected]>wrote:

>
> I'm opting out of this discussion. I'm fine with 'experimental',
> 'unstable' or 'incubating' or 'tech preview' or whatever. You need to make
> a decision quickly, because we'll need to change all references to
> 'experimental' in the code and documentation before we can get 1.2-rc-1 out.
>
> A better time to have this discussion would have been when I sent the spec
> around, rather than the day we're trying to get a release out. That's the
> point of the specs - to document what we're going to do before we do it, so
> that people can give feedback.
>

We had a couple of times the discussion around the terminology and that at
least was wondering about something better. I should have turned it into a
story tough.

Hans


>
>
> On 30/08/2012, at 5:27 PM, Hans Dockter wrote:
>
> So far we have used the term experimental for features with the following
> attributes:
>
> - The implementation quality of the feature was already as good as it
> gets. But the API is not stable yet.
> - We were not sure whether the implementation quality was production ready
> (or we knew already that it wasn't). We don't release usually half baked
> stuff. But for features that are tough engineering challenges like the
> Gradle daemon or now the parallel build there is no chance to get it right
> from the beginning.
> - Both of the above.
>
> I'm not sure if the term experimental is the right one. When I hear
> experimental, my association is:
> 1.) That we are not sure yet whether the feature is of value to our users.
> We might drop it in the future.
> 2.) The quality is not very high.
>
> 1.) has never been the case of any of the features we are introducing as
> experimental.
> 2.) Might be the case, see above.
>
> I think it is pretty important to get the terminology right here as this
> 'experimentalness' is a crucial part of our development process (see:
> http://forums.gradle.org/gradle/topics/the_gradle_release_approach).
>
> We don't want to make things unnecessary complex. Then again we don't want
> that people get a misunderstanding.
>
> For some of those features the term unstable is I think the best one. If I
> had to decide between the term experimental or unstable I would go for
> unstable. It is also an established term for linux development. Another
> question is whether we want to use different terminologies to better
> capture the two scenarios decribed above. My feeling is that this is not
> necessary. For specific features like parallel build we can always print
> tailored warnings that manage the expectations for those features.
>
> So what I would like to discuss is whether we should use the term unstable
> instead of experimental:
> - When we talk about it in the forum
> - In the release notes
> - In the DSL
>
> Hans
>
> --
> Hans Dockter
> Founder, Gradle
> http://www.gradle.org, http://twitter.com/gradleware
> CEO, Gradleware - Gradle Training, Support, Consulting
> http://www.gradleware.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Adam Murdoch
> Gradle Co-founder
> http://www.gradle.org
> VP of Engineering, Gradleware Inc. - Gradle Training, Support, Consulting
> http://www.gradleware.com
>
>

Reply via email to