Yes, because I'm concerned that the cost due to unreliability will outweigh the benefit. I believe what "crossing the chasm" says : most technology decision makers are risk-averse because they have had bad experience with cutting edge technology in the past. Promoting disruptive technology to early adopters is one thing, reaching the conservative majority is quite another. Look at pyjs competitor: is there any that says it is cutting edge ?
PC On Monday, May 14, 2012 2:33:55 AM UTC+2, rnewpol wrote: > > Pierre - really? You find a quote on the web page to be a barrier to > trying out a potentially interesting, advantageous and free > technology? wow. > > > On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 5:24 AM, pca wrote: > > Anthony said: > > > > as a completely novice user, it would be fantastic if you'd record all > > barriers encountered, so they can be remedied in good time > > (sooner preferably). > > > > > > I've not decided yet to try it out, but please note the first barrier I > > encountered : Brian's comment on pyjs.org. > > > > PC > > > > On Sunday, May 13, 2012 10:47:36 AM UTC+2, C Anthony Risinger wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > In fact, I'm not sure I'm going to use it, because I'm not clear on > one > >> > point : does the pyjs community want pyjs to be bleeding edge > technology > >> > ? > >> > Please check the definition of bleeding edge technology on > wikipedia. > >> > >> Pierre, > >> > >> we are cutting teeth at the moment ... both adjusting to and preparing > >> for what may come, in addition to cleaning and repackaging what is > >> past. > >> > >> there is still very much to do. for the most part, the libraries are > >> already rather stable -- most of the focus ATM is improving the > >> marketability and consistency of what we already have; this includes > >> some refactoring and shuffling of existing code to make the toolchain > >> simpler. > >> > >> to answer, we are both. the tech itself is rather unprecedented, but > >> not fresh out the oven; we have many users running stable apps for > >> years or more. the focus to improve stability is one of employing > >> Continuous Integration servers and buildbots to run regression suites > >> in an automated fashion. tools like Github and the like will make > >> code review simpler, and increase transparency/awareness. these are > >> all steps in motion now, but unlikely to really affect noticeably for > >> at least 3-6 mo. > >> > >> my suggestion would be to simply try it out. if you encounter > >> problems, there are many knowledgeable people around who can help ... > >> and as a completely novice user, it would be fantastic if you'd record > >> all barriers encountered, so they can be remedied in good time (sooner > >> preferably). > >> > >> thanks, > >> > >> -- > >> > >> C Anthony >
