| 1 |
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:37 PM, pk <peterk2@××××××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hi, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Happened upon this interview with Linus Torvalds that some of you might |
| 5 |
> find interesting (if you haven't seen it already): |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/Feature-Articles/Linus-Torvalds-s-Lessons-on-Software-Development-Management/ba-p/440 |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Yeah, I just saw that. Admittedly, when I saw this section: |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
--begin-section-- |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I'll add at this point that this isn't just a programmer problem. I've |
| 14 |
seen entire companies get locked into the idea that “perfecting” the |
| 15 |
program was everything. They then neglected what the users wanted from |
| 16 |
the program, supporting the users and so on. Most of us who've been in |
| 17 |
the business for a while have seen this cycle play out over and over |
| 18 |
again. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Expanding on that second point, Torvalds says that's why the Linux |
| 21 |
kernel team is “so very anal about the whole ‘no regressions’ thing, |
| 22 |
for example. Breaking the user experience in order to ‘fix’ something |
| 23 |
is a totally broken concept; you cannot do it. If you break the user |
| 24 |
experience, you may feel that you have ‘fixed’ something in the code, |
| 25 |
but if you fixed it by breaking the user, you just violated that |
| 26 |
second point; you thought the code was more important than the user. |
| 27 |
Which is not true.” |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
--end-section-- |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I immediately thought of the udev thread. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
:wq |
Archives