[MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev's DevMUD: a word of caution

James Wilson jwilson at rochester.rr.com
Sun Nov 1 15:59:00 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998

On Sun, 01 Nov 1998, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

>> A waterfall model, rigidly hierarchical, works reasonably well for projects
>> which have full time staff and does not have a changing target to
>> implement.  It is the latter that has caused most of the problems in recent
>I haven't argued for any model or method.  I've argued for getting a common
>understanding of the domain, what the main goals are, what the main
>conflicts and trade-offs are etc..  I've also argued for not messing up
>analysis and design with descriptions of implementation concerns.  Then I
>have argued for making sure that there is a clear link to the end product:
>muds with users on 'em.

that 'Cathedral and Bazaar' essay sure is getting cited a lot. for what it's
worth, it clearly states that you have to start with something solid that
people can actually work with. Linux started with Minix, fetchmail started as
some other pop-client, etc, so at every point there was actually something
useful to hack on.


More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list