On 30/11/05, Newsbyte <Newsbyte at freenethelp.org> wrote: > "While documentation of FNP has always lagged behind development as it > has in-effect been a work in progress for the past few years," > > Translation: we are *always* in a work of progress, so our documentation is > always going to be obsolete.
Not a very accurate translation. We are currently a work in progress, we won't always be. > " FCP has always been reasonably well specified. " > > Translation: The meager and obsolete documentation we do have, we'll > describe as 'reasonably well specified', such as to counter all the requests > for it in a more easy way then actually creating the necessary docs. Another inaccurate explanation. The current FCP specs have been more than adequate to permit the implementation of Frost, Fuqid, and numerous other third-party apps. Since you are clearly such an expert, perhaps you can explain what is wrong with the FCP specifications? > "Specs do not yet exist for FCP in 0.7 because FCP in 0.7 is still > under development." > > Translation: We don't do specs before a release, and we don't do it > afterwards. This is, because first it is still under development, and (see > first argument) later it's always a work in progress. So, basically, we > never do it right. Thanks for lecturing us on what is right, because you are clearly such an expert on software development that you have never, to my knowledge, written a line of code for this project in your life. We don't do specs on something before it is specified. To do otherwise would be moronic. FCP for pre-0.7 was specified, and specified adequately enough for numerous third-party applications to implement. If you disagree, please bless us with your expert knowledge of exactly what is wrong with the current FCP specs. > "How do you expect us to document FCP in 0.7 before we have even > settled on the requirements for it?" > > Translation: We don't know what we're going to implement, and can only try > it out first, and then decide what specifications we're going to use, once > it's finished. *cough* If it weren't a work in progress then, that is. Wow, you must be a real expert in writing software if you can document something before you have finalized what it is you are building. Again, please bless us with your expert knowledge of software development and explain how we do that. > "Instead of moaning that "someone should do this" or "someone should do > that", why not do something useful and offer to help us develop a > spec?" > > Translation: Shut up and do it yourself. People who have criticism or point > something out are whiners who we don't have to listen too, because they > don't contribute anything, and are in general trolls, because they don't > deliver any code. Exept when we are out of money or need testers, ofcourse, > then they are welcome, but we can call them non-contributing moaning whiners > afterwards anyway. Actually, you are one of the few people who, despite having no discernible experience in software engineering, insist in lecturing those that do on how to engineer software. This lack of knowledge must be powerful indeed if it lets you specify software before its design has even been finalized, and determine that our FCP spec is meagre and obsolete even though it has been used by a number of people to write third-party software with great success. > "Very little happens in open source projects unless people are > willing to take responsibility for getting things done themselves, > rather than just asking others why it isn't happening." > > Translation: With a good-sounding generalisation and a long one-liner, I > make the irrational assumption palatable that non-coders should create the > code, so the devls themselves are absolved from any effort in making the > specs more accesible for other potential devs, which would make Freenet a > more popular program for third party tools/devls and ultimately for the > public at large. Instead, we just say they have to do it themselves, knowing > full well it's actually a coders' job, but it helps in delegating our > responsability to Freenets' ordinary users, especially those who dare to > criticise. Well, if you can't write code, then why are you telling us how to write the code? Hey ho, I see you haven't changed - I guess its time to reapply my newsbyte -> /dev/null filter. How ever will we survive without your invaluable and informative contributions? Ian.
