On Jan 25, 2010, at 22:02, Timothy Collett wrote: > On Jan 25, 2010, at 9:57 PM, John C. Welch wrote: >> Um, from what I'm seeing, that's EXACTLY what's happening. Move fast or you >> lose. And history shows that if it's not in 1.0, the chances of 2.0 are >> pretty damned small, contrary to popular meme. Why? Because if it's not in >> 1.0, the people who care about this feature don't USE 1.0, and so the >> overall need for it drops. They're off using something else, and so the >> people who are left didn't care anyway. > > And you're not even willing to consider the possibility that, "We won't > commit to it within the first week of the app's conception" means exactly > that, and nothing more? > > Timothy Collett >
Well, instead of architecting things out in a logical manner with <insert tracking system here> so that individual features and concerns can be debated ad nauseum in their own silos, and assigned priorities and a roadmap established, we're spinning yarns via an email list. -nick _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com
