Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Do you know where your variables are?
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01

by Popcorn Dave (Abbot)
on Dec 01, 2008 at 20:43 UTC ( #727213=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
in thread RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01

"Vast changes were made, based on what I wanted the module to do, compared to what it used to do. The list of changes is not so important, actually."

While I agree that it's useful for people to see if your interface is user friendly, to say that the list of changes isn't important seems to fly in the face of everyone using the original module doesn't it? If they're happy with the old module, why should they change without seeing the list of changes you've made?


To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable - Barry Goldwater


Comment on Re^3: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
Re^4: RFC: CGI::Uploader V 2.90_01
by ron.savage (Novice) on Dec 04, 2008 at 02:43 UTC
    I see your point. I was concerned that the changes would be assessed in a tiny-point by tiny-point manner, which would obscure the view of the overall redesign. Also, I want people using the previous version to stop and think about their app design, not just expect that a couple of lines need to be changed. That's why the version has jumped to 2.90* in preparation for release as V 3.
      If you have rewritten and broken backwards compatibility, and you don't know of/don't care about the migration of existing users (I hear you saying, if it doesn't work then their design is bad and thus their fault), why not make it a new module entirely or a subclass? I'd be upset if I upgraded a module and found it was wildly different, requiring me to rewrite my app if I wanted to use it.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://727213]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (8)
As of 2014-07-31 10:29 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite superfluous repetitious redundant duplicative phrase is:









    Results (248 votes), past polls