From: Andreas Huber (ahd6974-spamgroupstrap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-10-29 15:54:25
Johan Nilsson wrote:
> Could the NIH syndrome be diminished by easier accepting more people
> into the actual development process for a particular library? Ok, so
For me the NIH syndrome always implies a good amount of non-technical
arguments, which are almost absent here. So, I don't think that the
boost community actually suffers from NIH. It might suffer from
over-perfectionism. However, I believe this is exactly the reason for
the exceptional quality of the libraries and would therefore not want to
change anything.
> I'm mostly a lurker here, but even so I believe I've seen people from
> time to time declaring their willingness to participate in developing
> a new library, without getting some real response. Take them in, let
> them be a part of the effort, and maybe the NIH problem will be
> lessened.
I'm rather skeptical about that approach. Groups of similarly capable
people are usually not very good at *designing* a library (unless
there's a boss who has the last word on all the decisions). However, I
think groups are unbeatable at uncovering design-flaws. So the best
designs are initially often invented by an individual and the input
later given by a group (users, boost-members, etc.) should then be used
to refine until both sides are satisfied. Unfortunately, this puts most
of the burden on the library submitter but I think it is the best
process if you aim for high quality.
Regards,
-- Andreas Huber When replying by private email, please remove the words spam and trap from the address shown in the header.