4 ms·
My biggest pet peeve with projects is when the feature list is actually a mix of features and things that are "upcoming"/"to be supported." This feature list is
by Shank 10y ago
My biggest pet peeve with projects is when the feature list is actually a mix of features and things that are "upcoming"/"to be supported." This feature list isn't really a feature list either: it's just "simple" and "fast" (but fast is just 'written in a new exciting programming language'). Interruption and resuming is the first actual feature, but that's "soon."
Feature lists should be feature lists. On open source projects especially, I've seen "soon" take weeks or months. Move features that aren't features into a "upcoming" or "planned" block or make an issue, but don't list it as a feature when it isn't implemented.
- paulddraper 10y agoI think you're being overly-critical for alpha software. If they want to mix the feature list with the roadmap or keep them separate, it doesn't really matter. I assume the incomplete feature list is precisely the reason for the alpha label. I may be reading too much in between the lines, but your comment sounds like "I don't want to hear about software until it is finished. If it's not ready for prime time, keep it on your hard drive."
- andrewvijay 10y agoIm sorry but I find the parent very correct here. The headline is hype based. The README shows no signs of benchmarks or comparisons to define its acclaimed speed. Also mentioning an upcoming feature in the headline is not something people would prefer. Its still okay as its open source and people can do what they want. But to be taken seriously, it needs to be as realistic and true as possible.