[ros-dev] Nevermind

[TwoTailedFox]

Don't run before you can walk.

On 8/29/05, Michael B. Trausch <fd0man at gmail.com> wrote:
> Rick Langschultz wrote:
> >
> > Why not; right? why envision something and it fail to be realized,
> > waste of time if i ever knew it...
> >
> 
> Well, I can tell you one thing, I wouldn't want a person with that
> attitude even hanging around one of my projects.
> 
> The thing barely works at the moment.  Look at the ideas that you're
> pushing and tell me how you think they would be implemented in the
> source tree that they are working on right this moment.  The system is
> in very heavy, active development.  What does this mean?  They need it
> to work... and they need it to work right.  Features are great and all,
> but if the basic system isn't there, why implement the features?  Pointless.
> 
> The second thing is this:  If you want it so badly, pick up a couple of
> books, a good copy of the GNU Compiler Collection and appropriate
> libraries, and get to work!  Open Source is great because when someone
> wants a feature, they can implement it... they don't have to coerce
> others to implement a feature or a bug fix like you do when you're
> working with Microsoft Windows.  Think with your head, man.
> 
> I'm sure that they will work on performance related things and toys,
> when the things *work*.  They're putting a lot of work into the system;
> I know that the activity on the project has picked up a lot from what it
> used to be about a year ago... the developers are working hard as they
> can to try to make things really happen with this project.  And if I had
> the time and the know-how, I'd be doing something, myself, other then
> watching it run past me in my inbox.
> 
> Hopefully, if I ever get time to get the know-how to work on it, they'll
> still need help ;-).
> 
> But the point is, don't complain, because if you don't want to implement
> it yourself, then you don't want it badly enough.  This project isn't
> about world domination (well, maybe it is, but it's free software, so,
> I'll make the assumption that it's not).  It gives people a choice.  It
> gives people a great resume piece, too.  When this system becomes the
> little guy that tromped over the big bad fugly creature, the people that
> are working on this project will have something that I probably won't
> get -- a great chance at a great life with lots of vacation time and the
> like, because these people will be in demand on the job market.
> 
> >From a technical perspective, it would be stupid to implement such
> things right now, anyway.  It is harder to pinpoint a bug if you're
> working with two highly unstable things verses one.  React has a lot of
> components in it that aren't tested well enough yet, and probably have
> bugs.  It'd be better to hit a stable version and then add new features
> to it like what you're suggesting.  It'd reduce the amount of time
> required to implement said features, as well, becuase you wouldn't have
> to go on as much or as long of a wild goose chase to find it.
> 
> So, then, all that having been said, go on, see ya later.  :-)
> 
>         - Mike
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.com
> http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> 
> 
> 


-- 
"I had a handle on life, but then it broke"