On 9/28/10 7:41 PM, Risker wrote:
Yes it is, and it's an important one.
Several of us had already been
working on a plan for the second trial, and those of us discussing had
widely agreed that it would be much more likely to be successful if more of the
recommendations on improving the software were incorporated, thus our
recommendation that it not proceed so rapidly.
I respect what you are saying here,
very much. But I think the right
approach is always "release early, release often". There is no need to
rush, but there is also no reason not to release fixes as they are
available, because there is no particular "ship date" with marketing, etc.
Jimmy, here's where you're wrong. The first version was marketed as the
solution that would allow the [[George W. Bush]] article to be publicly
edited - it was marketed that way on and off wiki - and instead we had 40
hours of non-stop IP vandalism and browser crashes for almost every
reviewer.