On 4/24/2011 3:09 PM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 13:41 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
[ . . . ]
The review process leading up to the voting was not, however, a joke or
unanimous or anything similar. I received plenty of tough-but-fair
criticism and it led to substantial improvements in the library and
especially the documentation.
Which is perhaps why the review process itself is incredibly valuable
but the vote process is a bit fatuous as a decision making system.
I understand the points being made here, but I actually think votes from
people who know little about topic X are valuable when evaluating API
design for a topic X library. People who would only use a topic X
library occasionally are probably in the best position to judge whether
simple things are sufficiently simple. People who would use such a
library all the time are probably so well versed in the topic and would
use the advanced features so often that they're likely to overlook this
aspect.
