[sldev] Development philosophy
robla at lindenlab.com
Wed Feb 14 14:43:19 PST 2007
On 2/14/07 2:24 PM, Jason Giglio wrote:
> More specifically, can we expect the following:
> 1. Linden Lab sign-offs on major functionality before work begins
> 2. Any assurance our code will be merged, ahead of time
> I don't have these expectation, but it seems that some do.
Well, those that hold those expectations should defend that
expectation. I'm not aware of any open source project that agrees
incorporate code from an outside contributor before its written and
before that contributor has developed a track record as a trusted
As an example, the plugin architecture is something that is of very high
risk to the stability of the codebase if done incorrectly, and is
something that people will expect Linden Lab to support years from now.
The phrase "the devil is in the details" immediately comes to mind, and
specifically, the details are the code itself. So, will Linden Lab
agree in advance to incorporate code we haven't reviewed? No.
> Specifically can you reply to the following:
> Tim said:
> > My hopes are that LL has already signed on to all of this, and we're
> > just not getting the full story (suprise), so this will all work out
> This "development roadmap" that looks like something straight out of a
> PMI exam study guide:
> I edited out "linden sign off" but the rest is almost as bad. This
> was the version as it stood before I edited it.
Well, I don't think it's necessary or appropriate to start throwing
rocks. The earlier versions was a good early drafts, but I agree that
the current version is an improvement. I had meant to get clarification
on what was expected by "sign off", per my comments above.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070214/3846475d/signature.pgp
More information about the SLDev