> Forgive me if this is just flamebait, but I think multiple options for the same function is usually a bad idea. Sure, OSS is all about choice, but more often than not (without having done extensive research on the subject), one very-well-designed option that everyone stood behind would have served the community better than 2 or 3 choices that cause endless disagreements.
Information keeps coming out that "one true way" just does not exist. Quantitative studies show that multiple options are actually best.
It's confusion and non-discoverability that need to be kept down. Often people try to limit confusion by limiting choice, but that is an artificial approach.
Excellent point. But I think TMTOWTDI is often used as an easy excuse for not doing the hard work of solving disagreements & designing a single good solution. Often the multiple choices available don't really serve a good purpose, except that some aspects of each choice are designed better than the alternative, so neither choice solves the problem completely. If the designers of both choices were to put their best ideas together, then more often than not, you wouldn't have to provide multiple overlapping solutions.
I like the way The Zen of Python states it: "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it." I guess that still allows for what you're saying.
I really like Teto's proposal, and think it's a more intuitive option. It also would require a lot of development, I think, so I would rather see the smaller problems with the existing filter system fixed. Otherwise we all just have to wait another 3 years to get a filter/effects system that's pleasant to use! I feel like we've all been waiting a long time already for the current filter system to become pleasant to use (no offense to the developers -- I love it & use it anyway).
But I think if we go with Teto's proposal, when it's complete it will provide all the functionality that the current filter editor has (and much more), in a simpler, more widely-understood interface, so why would we bother maintaining a separate piece of code that offers less and is no simpler to use?
Maybe I'm just knee-jerking. I get frustrated by the GTK vs QT situation on the Linux desktop, which has watered down so much valuable OSS human resource over the years, for very little gain (ok, now there's some flamebait for everyone... email me privately if you want to shoot me down).
Malcom Gladwell explains it quite well in this TED talk:
http://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce.html
Very relevant, thanks. I've been reading "The Tipping Point" recently, same author -- great book, though not really applicable in this context.
On another note, it strikes me that although his main point (we need to give people choices) is relevant, the specific options are still based significantly on market research. None of the best options were chosen simply because some academic hypothesized they would be popular.
Another Zen of Python applies here: "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess."
- Bry