Is there anything *enjoyable* about our development process?

[Neil Williams]

On Friday 14 October 2005 9:13 pm, Chris Shoemaker wrote:
> > Yeah, certainly.  My list has been:
> >
> > - fix the module/library system.

I'll gladly sort that out.

> > - get rid of scheme, it's dependencies and the startup loop.

Yes please!

> > - reduce complexity

Is standardisation (filenames and function names, whitespace etc.) a bonus for 
that? If new developers can follow the program flow more easily, will that 
not reduce the *perception* of complexity? gnucash will remain complex, it 
just needs to be easier to explain and understand.

> >   - module system, as before
> >   - reporting
> >   - register
> >
> > These all go toward one goal: making the gnucash code small, lean and
> > fast.  This leads to more users, which leads to more contributers.  It
> > also makes the existing codebase and developers more nimble, as there's
> > less to worry about.
>
> I agree that all those things are good goals, but how do we get there?
> There's a chicken-and-egg problem here.  All that "clean
> up/simplification" does reduce pain and it does feedback into more
> developers, but it takes work, which takes the developer time we don't
> have.

It's ironic that we are spending so much time discussing this now when there 
is so much pressure for G2. After G2, I am willing to take on a portion of 
that work.

The work on cashutil will provide *a* focus for me in removing guile from more 
of the lower levels of gnucash, like replacing the module system. The spin 
out of QOF will allow me to completely overhaul the source for that library 
and set out a clear naming convention for files and functions.

Of course it takes time, the only thing we can do is do what we can in the 
areas we each know best.

> I guess that's the key of what I'm saying: I don't believe that making
> codebase simplification the #1 priority will achieve codebase
> simplification.  However, making "something else" the #1 priority
> *will* achieve codebase simplification incidentally.

Does that "something else" have to be the same for everyone? As long as the 
aims and standards of the code simplification are established, does it 
matter?

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/attachments/20051015/8c049b05/attachment.bin