Testing reports

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 03:27:00PM +0100, Colin Scott wrote:
 
> Who in their right mind is going to provide a full spec unless they
> think there is some chance of being implemented.

I didn't have in mind a full waterfall-compliant spec, but a
relatively complete outline of the feature desired and so on.  At
least half of the responses I see are, in effect, saying that the
trade-off implicit in the feature request is a bad one.  Part of that
trade-off, note, is "Developer's time is used."  The developers in a
volunteer effort get to make that determination.

> Ah, now there's a new can of worms!  :-)  It strikes me that anybody who is in a position to do that is in a position to buy a commercial package.  Ask yourself why people use free software?  So I would hazard a guess that feature sponsorships are *very* rare on the ground.
> 

I don't know why others use free software.  In my case, much of the
time I use it because it's the best option.  For example, I think
Postgres is better than almost all of the competition for vast numbers
of problems (and vastly better than MySQL, Oracle, or DB2 in many of
those cases).  BIND is still the most widely-used DNS server and
recursive resolver, and despite some reservations I have its operation
is better than much of the competition.  Postfix is certainly the best
mail server I've ever encountered, and still makes Exchange look like
a toy.  The only reason I bought a Mac laptop was that the battery
support was better in those days than I could get on Linux, and the
most recent "improvements" in OSX Lion suggest to me that I'll be
replacing this laptop with an Ubuntu-running one next time around.  In
any case, I want a command line, and Windows doesn't offer it.

I selected gnucash because it was something that ran on my computer.
The thing my accountant wants me to use (QuickBooks) requires
Windows.  Every interaction I have with Windows makes me want to go
screaming into the night, so I naturally looked for an alternative.
Gnucash was the only one whose manual I understood.  Maybe I should
have hired a book-keeper instead.

> Because you (by which I mean "all you developers", and I don't know
> if you personally are one such or not!  :-) have no definition

You better hope not.  I can't program my way out of a paper bag.  (I
write a mean SQL query, though.)

> either of what gnucash is trying to be, nor of what is its target
> market, you have no means of assessing whether or not any given
> proposal is one that it would be sensible to devote time and effort
> to developing.

The plain fact about free software with volunteer maintainers is that,
for every developer, the "target market" is usually him/herself.  If
you do something in your spare time, the primary motivation for that
is going to be whatever motivates you -- this is just a tautology.
The effect is that the motivations of others who are not offering help
with your project are not that interesting.  Why that should be
remotely controversial is mystifying to me.

Every free software project I've ever been involved with occasionally
has the experience of someone coming to the mailing list and wagging
his (it seems always to be "his") finger at the developers, telling
them that they have all the wrong priorities &c &c.  These people
often appear to be vexed that others are not willing to do for them
something they are unable to do themselves (directly or, by paying
someone, indirectly).  Eventually, they seem to get annoyed and stomp
away with dire warnings about the impending doom for the project
because their sage advice is going unheeded.  Every now and then, one
of them instead moves from acting like a crank sitting in the peanut
gallery into being a productive contributor to the project.  This is
just an observation, of course, _a propos_ of nothing.

Best regards,

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com