Testing reports

[Colin Scott]

> For what it's worth, I didn't read the response that way at all.  

Even by your own remarks it seems a pretty inescapable conclusion that for anyone who is not able to contribute and not able to provide a well-worked-out specification - which is going to be a pretty large proportion of your users.

> you're more likely to get a positive reaction with a well-worked-out
> specification

Who in their right mind is going to provide a full spec unless they think there is some chance of being implemented.  I guess it must have happened, but I don't recall seeing any request for an enhancement or fix ever being met with a "give us a spec" (let alone "give us a spec and we'll do it"!).  The more usual reply might be better paraphrased as "not interested" or "bad idea", with an occasional "good idea" thrown in.  Beyond that, nothing unless the quesioner gets persistent, in which case it becomes "Put up and DIY, or shut up".

I oversimplify for brevity, but I don't think I'm that far out.

> -- and, for that matter, an offer to sponsor the feature -- 

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 continue to believe that there is a fundamental problem here.  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 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.

Colin

-------- Original Message --------

*Subject:* Re: Testing reports
*From:* Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com>
*To:* gnucash-user at gnucash.org
*Date:* Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:17:07 -0400

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 01:53:00PM +0100, Colin Scott wrote:
> 
> In other words, if you're a user of gnucash, but for whatever reason
> unable to contribute code, then you're on your own. 

For what it's worth, I didn't read the response that way at all.  What
I _did_ read is that, if you're a user of gnucash, and you're unable
to contribute code, then your chances of getting exactly what you want
when you want it are lower.  By the same token, if you're unable to
contribute code, you're more likely to get a positive reaction with a
well-worked-out specification -- and, for that matter, an offer to
sponsor the feature -- than if you come with a vague suggestion or a
complaint that something doesn't work the way you want. 

This is exactly the same condition as in any free software project,
with the additional hurdle tht the developer community is smaller
than, say, the Linux kernel hackers.

Best,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user at gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
-----
Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.