[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "tla commit" generates a patch-set even if there ar

From: James Blackwell
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] "tla commit" generates a patch-set even if there are no changes
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 17:04:39 -0400

In lists.arch.users, you wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 03:09:02PM -0400, James Blackwell wrote:
>> As such, I really don't want to worry about today's users at the costs
>> of tomorrow's users. Sure, we may break the interface today and piss off
>> some of our users. Who knows. Maybe we'd even loose a few. More likely,
>> those with scripts will grumble and whine that the tool has changed, fix
>> their scripts. Two months later, they won't even remember that they had
>> to change the script.
> I whole heartedly agree.  It'd be nice to get somebody who understand user 
> interfaces to help even out the interface.  Once though you have gotten
> the interface set in stone, I hope that breaking the interface is subject
> to some kind of change control.

We talked out of band about this one a little bit. I whole-heartedly
agree. Some day, when we've got two million users, we should approach
any modification/deletion to the interface with trepidation.

>> Obviously, we should go through the pains of clearing up the interface
>> today. We should eliminate tripping hazards in today's interface by 
>> ensuring that all commands have a consistant interface (even if that
>> breaks the nine or ten scripts 'out there'). We should make sure that
>> our surface lines up as straight as possible today, so that when we do
>> cast our interface in concrete, we have a nice, straight path for users.
> As a sysadmin, it's important that tools change as little as
> possible especially for revision control because my users would
> write wrapper scripts around tla (they do for cvs today) because in
> a large environment like mine computing environment architects they
> don't have time to handhold other users on how to use a tool and
> thus are wrapperized to do specific tasks.

Again, when arch has a large following, I agree. But we're not there

> Changing the interfaces causes unacceptable breakages that can create
> a lot of problems.  You certainly don't want to encourage enterprise
> or business use if you plan on creating interface design flux.
> I do urge though that some kind of change control be in place
> at some point in the future and that you have a structured
> process in making those changes as well.  

I agree.

James Blackwell          Please do not send me carbon copies of mailing
Smile more!              list posts. Such mail is unsolicited. Thank you!

GnuPG (ID 06357400) AAE4 8C76 58DA 5902 761D  247A 8A55 DA73 0635 7400

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]