Jonathan Gordon wrote:
> Lastly I'll remind the people that need reminding that everyone here
> is doing it as a hobby, when it doesnt become fun anymore people
> leave. The only people who could be considered having any authority to
> activly force someone to work on something (or not work on something)
> is the RSB and the most likely outcome of that is burnt bridges and
> people leaving.
As I haven't contributed any significant amount of code to Rockbox for a
long time, I guess I could be described as a person who has left the
The reason for this is simply that Rockbox has met my personal needs for
a long time, and I'm guessing this is the same for a lot of the older
generation of devs (i.e. people who have been contributing since the
early days of Rockbox). Obviously this isn't the case for everyone though.
But my personal view is that features should only be added to Rockbox
when there is a general concensus that it is a good idea. When 95% of
devs don't express an opinion on a new feature, then I would read that
as saying "we don't want it".
For me, the main reason for excluding new features is maintainability.
The bigger Rockbox gets, the harder it is to maintain - and the number
of open bug reports should be proof of that. Rockbox is now bigger than
the active development community can maintain.
Also, if only one or two devs are interested in a new feature, then
that's going to mean that only those devs are going to be motivated
enough to fix bugs in it. That's another reason features should be of
general interest to the devs before being committed.
But I fully agree that this is a hobby and we do what we want to do, and
we do it for fun. But for me, the fun has gone.
Received on 2010-10-09