On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 10:31 PM, Steven Walling <swalling(a)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
--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate