Timeline for answer to Community Engagement Across the Network: Focus for 2026 by M--
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23 at 14:40 | comment | added | M-- | @starball No, there is a difference between a "living list of improvements" and leaving a product without a functional foundation. I’m asking for functional viability. When a UI remains broken for 2+ years, that isn't evaluating impact over time, it's leaving a house without a roof. We can't know if these experiments are/were good or bad because we have never actually tested a viable version. "Finishing" in this context means paying the development debt until the tool actually works as intended, rather than leaving it in a state of perpetual beta-neglect while chasing the next new project. | |
| Jan 23 at 9:02 | comment | added | Lundin | I think what's really missing is a QA team. All professional companies no matter what product development they work with have these. Except SO, apparently. I doubt they even have an established software development procedure. | |
| Jan 23 at 7:54 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek | @starball one might argue one of the problems SE has is... the core functions are finished, and work pretty well - and many experiments are not. I'd say finishing here is getting things to a working state, or abandoning them, followed by the terribly boring task of keeping stuff maintained over time | |
| Jan 23 at 6:05 | comment | added | starball Mod | I (personally) might have phrased "start finishing" as "keep improving the stuff that is good". (is there always a clear finish line? there's very often a long-lived / living list of improvements that could be made) | |
| Jan 23 at 0:51 | history | answered | M-- | CC BY-SA 4.0 |