RE: SSIP Project Status
- From: Jamal Mazrui <empower@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:41:52 -0500 (EST)
I think the terms "customer" and "rush" are a mischaracterization of the
facts in this case. There is no contract with deliverables and no
commercial product involved (as far as I know). The scale of this
project and skill of the developer is such that when he posted
almost-ready updates over a period of months,, it was reasonable to
expect that he would make an initial test version to colleagues on a
particular list. I like and admire him and tried to convey a more
successful open source perspective based on my experience and
observation with the open source world.
The fact that you criticized my intervention, however, does illustrate a
difference in philosophy that I will gladly defend. Apparrantly, another
philosophy is to talk big, avoid actually putting code on the line with
others, procrastinate on completing the job, and then make excuses about
many other, more important priorities that have since taken over. Thank
goodness most successful open source projects did not adopt that
philosophy! I do not expect to try any version of a Java screen reader in
the foreseeable future ....
Jamal
On Fri, 8 Feb
2008, Sina Bahram wrote:
> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 10:11:35 -0500
> From: Sina Bahram <sbahram@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: SSIP Project Status
>
> There are several models to support these various demands. For mitigating
> risk, for example, the spiral model works rather well. For an extremely well
> defined project, the waterfall model seems to be the one of choice, and for
> a dynamic system which will involve large amounts of customer feedback, an
> agile development model merried to scrum practices and a little bit of
> spiral thrown in for risk mitigation seems to be preferable.
>
> Rush, Rush, Rush to release and patch later, I believe is the wrong model,
> *smile*.
>
> This is why lots of companies have rightfully learned that releasing any
> kind of date is just stupid, because there is no understanding amongst
> fellow developers of their products, much less the customer.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of tribble
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:35 PM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: SSIP Project Status
>
> Kind of a pain in the last centure too...*smile* So how about a beta release
> and request for comments...
> It was my experience when doing development that customers demanded things
> to be on time even when some features were not quite implemented. There was
> always a tug of war between the people dealing with customers and the people
> doing the R&D trying to get important features implemented before a release.
> Customers have their own deadlines to worry about, and sometimes they wanted
> stuff early and incomplete, but preferably a functioning release if that was
> possible. At least if you call your software a beta, the expectations
> weren't so high.
> Comments?
> I think to handle the problem supporting legacy code, a group should be
> assigned the task of easing the impact of upgrading by writing tools that
> help the process and/or contracting with customers to assist in the
> transition.
> --le
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sina Bahram" <sbahram@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 10:05 AM
> Subject: RE: SSIP Project Status
>
>
> While I agree with this to a certain extent. There's a great deal of pain,
> overhead, and possible establishment of buggy/legacy code when one is not
> careful with this strategy. The logical extension of this method is the
> release now, patch later, policy which is something most professional
> software engineers abhor as one of the largest failures of computer science
> in this century.
>
> Lots of users won't upgrade, don't feel that it's necessary to read the
> release notes detailing any functionality issues, and will still expect a
> working, professional, and evens supported product at the end of the day.
> Therefore, to avoid some of this, so that development and not answering
> support emails can be the target of one's time, I would say a certain
> baseline for a release is necessary and advisable so as to avoid some of the
> above headache.
>
> Of course, these are my humble thoughts, and I'm not trying to actually
> imply that they are worth anything.
>
> Take care,
> Sina
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jamal Mazrui
> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 7:31 AM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: SSIP Project Status
>
> A suggestion, Jay: don't let perfection be the enemy of the good. There
> will always be ways of improving a program. It sounded like you were far
> enough along to at least release a first public beta using the existing,
> more limited API of Window-Eyes, as well as that of other screen readers.
> Experience, feedback, and new technologies will naturally help the program
> improve over time if you are committed to it.
> No one expects a bug free introduction!
>
> Cheers,
> Jamal
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Macarty, Jay
> {PBSG} wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 21:23:08 -0600
> > From: "Macarty, Jay {PBSG}" <Jay.Macarty@xxxxxxxx>
> > Reply-To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: SSIP Project Status
> >
> > Rick,
> > I am working on the Windows version of the SSIP server. I currently
> > have a voice interface implementation for Window-Eyes which uses their
> > existing COM object. I was hoping to use their new COM capability to
> > finish out a lot of the function calls which currently are not
> > accessible like setting or retrieving the voice, rate, pitch, or volume.
> > These functions are all available in the SSIP interface but only the
> > SAPI configuration lets all be accomplished.
> >
> > I'd be interested in talking with your contact at GW to find out
> > exactly what their interest is in SSIP. Can you put us together? If
> > you want to send me contact info off list, just send it to
> > jay.macarty@xxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard
> > Thomas
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 5:17 AM
> > To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: SSIP Project Status
> >
> >
> > Hi Mac and Guys:
> > I was just asked by one of the techies at GW Micro about the SSIP
> > Project Status. I'm not sure so I am asking. Last episode it was
> > working and getting set to run on various language platforms, sounds
> > like I know what I'm saying - grin. Anyway what is the status?
> > Is there a url where I can direct him to find out more? This is
> > interesting as he is a graybeard Developer over at GW and it is being
> > asked as WE is getting a new Scripting Language, hmmm.
> > Rick Farmington Mich. USA
> >
> >
> >
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
Other related posts:
