On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
But I want to fundamentally reject a norm I think I am hearing here: that we should be working toward perfection upfront, rather than iteration.
I don't believe that's a fair characterization of what's been said. My main point is this: We need to take front-end performance and maintainability seriously, and it can't become someone else's problem. If the first deployment (or more accurately, the renewed deployment) of this feature causes some temporary degradation that is addressed a week later, fine. But let's please not just get it out the door just for the sake of it without addressing known issues. Once again, existing front-end performance issues are not a good reason to add new ones.
The experience of having a horde of people, most of whom are theoretically supposed to be enabling change, pile on a long overdue enhancement yet again is just depressing,
Actually, you've already gotten a free "pizza for labor" offer in this thread, pointers to concrete patches that address the issue, QA testing from yours truly on vacation, and lots of feedback on the existing implementation. Not a single person has objected to the change, and multiple people have expressed excitement about getting it out the door. I wouldn't call that a negative attitude towards change. I would call it lots of passion and energy in favor of making changes, and doing it right. Relax - we're all on the same team. :-)
Erik