Special User Sections > Site/Forum Features

NANY 2011 :: A New Concept -- Have your say!

<< < (9/14) > >>

Stoic Joker:
Well I was trying to respond to 40hz ... but I don't type fast enough.

Along those lines (but just to the side), I also thing that the documentation requirement would (most likely) spin the whole thing off into the weeds. Let me just toss a few thing out in that direction:

1. A fully "packaged" application is (headed to being) more about marketing than coding. If you have something with that much work into it ... You'll be needing to rationalize not selling it (so the kids can eat), before deciding to giving it away.

2. A truly exceptional application is one that fills it's intended purpose in a complete, elegant, and user friendly way - Not the one that comes in a fancy box (e.g. turd polish).

On a side note: I'm currently looking into doing the documentation for TC2010; which is a program I've been using for over 10 years - and am currently writing (you just can't get any more familiar with a program than that) - But if anything sinks the project, it will be that.

NANY (near as I can tell) Is a programming contest. Which says to me, that it's all about the code. I've long maintained the if something is truly done (written/designed) well...It doesn't need to be explained.

One of my favorite programs is SoftGears wWhoIS, it's a CLI program, with no documentation (that I've seen) ... and it doesn't need any either - it's usage is self explanatory - and I'd be lost without it.

One of DC's primary features is the Coding Snacks section. Where any Joe-off-the-street can gain access to a real live programmer, and ask if idea X is viable. Sometimes it's a clever enough niche to be made real, and sometimes it's and opportunity to educate the requester about an existing feature or application. Neither is bad.

NANY seems to work off the same vein, except it is driven by something kicking around in the head of the entrant. Holidays offer lots of downtime that isn't necessarily always filled with bustling, frolicking & family activities. If an idea can be slapped together in a presentable fashion, that will convey it intended purpose well ... It then has the potential to develop into (or inspire) something wonderful at a later date. Just because some entrants are better (more skilled) or faster than others (I'm slow as hell) doesn't mean their ideas will always pan out. The people that never fail, are frequently the ones that never really try either (failing is a good thing).

One of the things that took me (being more of a nuts-&-bolts guy) a while to grasp is that DC has a bit of an academic slant - e.g. The point of a discussion is to discuss the point, drawing a conclusion is optional. That's part of it's charm, and something that should not change.

40hz:
Also not to say that documentation needs to be written documentation. Something like those nice videos Mouser has provided for FARR could also count. At least IMHO.

Also - as StoicJoker points out, docs could spin NANY off into the weeds. That's why I suggested the whole issue of docs be treated as its own thing. Tech writing is a specialty anyway.

One of my favorite programs is SoftGears wWhoIS, it's a CLI program, with no documentation (that I've seen) ... and it doesn't need any either - it's usage is self explanatory -
-Stoic Joker (April 18, 2010, 10:27 AM)
--- End quote ---

Very valid point in those cases where a program is simple or single purposed enough that it works.

But some programs handle things that aren't intuitive such as video transcoding or graphic modeling. With this category of program, no matter what you do, it will still remain fairly complex to grasp and use. Look at Blender. It gets criticized for its complexity. But what it does will always remain a fairly complex set of tasks. And while the interface could be improved or streamlined, it won't make using Blender any easier for the end-user.

So for a program like Blender, good docs are a necessity.


One of the things that took me (being more of a nuts-&-bolts guy) a while to grasp is that DC has a bit of an academic slant - e.g. The point of a discussion javascript:void(0);is to discuss the point, drawing a conclusion is optional. That's part of it's charm, and something that should not change.

-Stoic Joker (April 18, 2010, 10:27 AM)
--- End quote ---

Well said. Never though of it exactly that way, but I think SJ just hit the nail on the head with that insight. :Thmbsup:

--------

Note: I just realized that since I'm shooting my mouth off about NANY, I probably should seriously start thinking about coding again. Been a whole lotta years since I've done much of that.

Gulp!

Perry Mowbray:
But what about if it was all optional like:
So basically removing the requirements and leaving it up to the entrant, something like this:

* NANY '11 Board opens with Instructions: Possibly as early as June.

* A Suggestion Thread that can be used for suggestions & discussions of ideas.
* Newsletters focus on the new NANY approach, etc through the year
* Volunteers are called for/made available for some of the "extra polish" for entries (possibility of supplying software) :

* Icons / Graphics
* Help Documentation
* Screencasts
* Pledge when ever you want.
* beta releases can be uploaded for Testing and Feedback (if the entrant thinks that's required or helpful)
* Release before December 31st (it's possible to pledge and release on the same day)
* Only one update: The New Year Wrap Up: 

* Which categorises all releases based on our running of the apps.
* Screencasts
* Aiming for publish mid-January-Perry Mowbray (April 18, 2010, 09:37 AM)
--- End quote ---

mouser:
So essentially.. the new new idea is: Make NANY much simpler.. less rules, less deadlines, less stress.
BUT.. try to provide the support and encouragement and testing for those that want it.

nosh:
Is NANY an acronym? If so, I still don't know what it stands for. In the spirit of simplicity I suggest a slight rebranding - give it a simpler/catchier name like GoCode or DoCode or DoCoGoCode. Ok, that's not much simpler. I'll stop now.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page