Michael Schumacher wrote:
>> spec writing seems to be a waste of time, competence and enthusiasm
>> at the moment. developers simply throw away a third of it and do what
>> they want. this pattern has been growing at GIMP over the last years.
>
> My feeling as only occasional contributor is that it is currently hard
> to determine if a spec is fully implemented or not, and if not, what
> parts are missing.
>
> Some specs, like e.g., Save & Export, seem to be next to complete.
it is not about incomplete implementation. although that happens, is
no fulfilling, but it at least gives a chance of ‘can be taken further,
also in the design, next time.’
the problem is complete substitution of a third of the design by
developer-made stuff. although the reasons for this may vary—straightforward
implementation; ‘I know better’; or the need for tinkering—the result
is always the same: a significant shift in the users-tech-project
balance, in favour of tech and at the cost of users and the project.
> Others, like the Unified Transform Tool, are implemented up to a point
> where any further steps felt like removing existing functionality - and
> have thus are thus left the tool in an inconsistent state.
it is not only the unified transform tool, although that is the one
that broke my back, certainly after our Vienna BOF. it is the string
of these things, and the ‘that’s the way it is’ cheerfulness that
developers display with it, that is exhausting me.
--ps
founder + principal interaction architect
man + machine interface works
http://blog.mmiworks.net: on interaction architecture
_______________________________________________
gimp-developer-list mailing list
gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list
