[opensource-dev] Open Development project: extending avatar wearables

[Joel Foner]

This is a pretty generic question, but I hope it will be helpful.

Under what conditions might it be possible to do a fairly quick to
release version and then iterate the feature behavior towards
something more sophisticated, without breaking things?

Best regards,

Joel

On 3/26/10, Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com> wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> I have no disrespect at all for Nyx. And yes, it's highly appreciated
> that he asks us for input instead of just implementing it.
>
> Still, if nothing in his original design is going to be changed
> then the effect is almost the same; except if this list is
> convinced that his original design is indeed the best.
>
> Apparently that stands or falls with having time (money) to do
> anything beyond what he already planned to do, and therefore
> explaining that is the only way to make the list understand this.
>
> Hence my question. Not because I think he is wrong, but because
> I want to know (and understand): Why not implement the extra
> requests from this list and then release the whole feature
> three months later? Imho it IS better to delay the feature and
> release a really well-thought-out new feature that will really
> work for a long time, than to be 3 months sooner and have people
> feel frustrated about little shortcomings for the next 3 years.
>
> Specifically to Jonathan: I'm sure this is a misunderstanding
> in the way my post came across. I appologise for that. It's
> sometimes hard to come accross correctly in written emails
> (I'm not even good at it in RL).
>
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 02:52:39PM -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 06:56, Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com> wrote:
>>
>>     It bothers me a bit that we (you) would choose to go
>>     for an implementation that is not the best or the
>>     ideal one, ONLY because you want to push out a new
>>     feature "in time".
>>
>>
>> Carlo, it pains me to see you have this attitude towards the
>> Lindens...especially those who are in here trying to communicate with us.
>> ***Linden Labs has limited resources*** They can't just magically allocate
>> time
>> and money to a feature that would be awesome because you think so.  They
>> have
>> time and money constraints.
>>
>>
>>     Personally, I'd first design how I'd want it to look
>>     from the user point of view (what most of the discussion
>>     from the community is about) without taking into account
>>     coding arguments. And once we have that, I'd just
>>     implement it, no matter the costs or time needed.
>>     That is what coders do: they implement what is requested.
>>
>>
>> This is a blind perspective to have.  Coding constraints come into play
>> because
>> coding takes time and when you are on a payroll with a budget, time =
>> money.
>> You have to sacrifice the really awesome feature that will take a while
>> for the
>> ones that are easy, but have an ok benefit.
>>
>> The Lindens aren't tools, my friend.  Perhaps showing more respect for
>> them
>> will give you respect in return by getting us new features.  And, keep in
>> mind,
>> this is an OpenSource forum.  If you have an idea, make it happen and
>> pitch it
>> to us.  Code it yourself and post it to the open forum.  The lindens have
>> enough on their plate as it is which is why they went the opensource route
>> to
>> begin with...having the assistance of the community make a better product.
>>
>>
>>     Thus, since for almost everything we said so far your
>>     argument is: we can't do that within the given timeframe;
>>     can you defend, or at least make acceptable and understandable
>>     that "a" new feature has to be added in 3 months, even if
>>     that new feauture is a bit inferior compared to what
>>     that UI could have looked like?
>>
>>
>> Again, show some respect here.  The lindens have a lot on their plate and
>> are
>> wanting you to make a business case for this.  They need to know a
>> feasible,
>> tangible way they can impliment feature ABC while not over taxing their
>> resources.  Also, this feature needs to be used by the whole and not a
>> small
>> percentage of users.
>>
>>
>>     Changing it AGAIN in the near future (ie, 6 months later)
>>     is probably not going to happen for several reasons :/
>>     So, not doing it right now has almost the same implications
>>     as deciding to never do it. I'd really like to understand
>>     why that is the best thing to do.
>>
>>     Thanks for discussing this with us,
>>     Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com>
>>
>>     PS With regards to the UI design.
>>       I like the concept of "click wear" inserts the wearable
>>       in a default place, after which you can reorder it.
>>       And where this inserting means "at the top of a folder
>>       that one of the currently existing wearable categories".
>>       It just makes sense.
>>
>>       But, in the end the goal should be that wearer can
>>       determine the order of every texture layer, or at
>>       least to a great extend, including:
>>       - Tucking in jackets or not (jacket <-> pants ordering)
>>         (my proposal was to add a pseudo jacket, below or
>>         above which other jackets are below or above the pants).
>>       - Wearing shirts over jackets (jacket <-> shirt ordering)
>>         (proposal was to be able to dump a jacket in the 'shirt'
>>         folder if one wishes).
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>>     http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
>>     Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>>     privileges
>>
>>
>> In conclusion, have a little more common courtesy.  The fact that the
>> Lindens
>> are participating as often as they are and engaging in good conversation
>> should
>> be something you shouldn't take for granted.
>>
>>
>> Think good business.
>>
>
> --
> Carlo Wood <carlo at alinoe.com>
> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

Contact:
Mobile: 508-728-2323
EMail: joel.foner at gmail.com
Skype: joel.foner

Follow:
http://www.twitter.com/joelfoner
http://joelfoner.com

CV:
http://joelfoner.com/about
http://www.linkedin.com/in/joelfoner