Setting mplementation expectations correctly (Was: Idea: Mass Text Messaging)

Rod Whitby rod at
Mon Mar 5 02:22:22 CET 2007

Ryan Kline wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2007, at 6:32 PM, Rod Whitby wrote:
>> Ryan Kline wrote:
>>> Could anyone write this as an extension to the openmoko software?
>> Yes, anyone could.  That's the beauty of open source :-)
> I meant, would anyone write this as an extension to the openmoko software?

I expect someone would.

But I think your question/request regarding implementation (as opposed
to specification) of this feature is a bit premature.

I can SMS to multiple recipients on my current Treo650, so I'd be
looking for that functionality too, and in three or six month times I
might be looking to implement that feature (if it hasn't been done already).

But how about we wait until the phone actually has a stable dialer (see for the
current state), and then has an actual working command-line SMS
interface, and *then* let's look at implementation of multiple
recipients (on the command line, and then in the GUI).

Don't get me wrong - this is not a complaint about the state of the
dialer, I am *very* impressed at the speed of OpenMoko development on
both the hardware and software, but some people (perhaps those who have
never worked on real-world commercial embedded development) seem to have
unrealistic expectations about the current state of this project.

At this point in the project, specification of features is what we
should be doing.  Requests for actual implementations may well be quite
premature at this point.

Sure, if you have a great idea and you have the skills to implement it,
then start now.  If you have a great idea, and someone else (outside of
the core team) has the drive and skills to implement it, and they have
the "itch" enough to start now, that's great too.

But vague requests like "can someone please implement this feature for
me" are not going to get much traction when the people who are best
placed to implement such features are busy getting the phone hardware
and basic software to actually work ...

[This is not meant to be a rant directed at you, Ryan, so please don't
take it personally.  It's meant to be a gentle reminder to the community
that we are not discussing additions to a finished product here, we are
participating in a project that is in the midst of basic product
development.  Let's set our questions and discussions in that context,
and be mindful of our expectations as far as *implementation* of things
goes (as opposed to specification of features we'd like to see).]

-- Rod

More information about the community mailing list