heh yes, but my point is that to make a true risk-benefit comparison requires something more than a cursory read of the main web page. Perhaps the quote is a dis-incentive to some - I don't know - but when our company decided to use pyjs, it was after trying out the technology, understanding a bit about the code and the project, and doing gap analysis on our requirements. To do any less is not due dilligence...that's my only point.
All that said, I actually find the quote somewhat misleading - there really isn't anything hair-on-fire, bleeding bloody ell cutting edge about pyjs - at least not now. I think the quote was put there to make pyjs sound cool (an early goal of pyjamas, no doubt) - not to make it sound like a great business platform. Finally, with THAT said, and with the new structure of this project...it probably is fair to (re) ask, "what *IS* the goal of pyjs to the development/business community at-large"? R On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 3:25 AM, pca <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
