Nathan, let me respectfully disagree.
Jon, we _DON'T_ want lots of users just yet. Look what happens when you get lots of users: they complain about features not being available;
Which is valuable. We cannot invent everything.
they complain that the interface isn't exactly like their favourite program XYZ;
Which is valuable. We cannot know all existing programs inside out, so why not use this help.
they clutter mailing lists up with questions answered already in the FAQ or user manual(which we haven't even written yet);
More incentive to write it. Or would you prefer writing to a nonexisting audience? This sounds like a perversion to me :)
and you spend the whole time worrying about fixing code to compile on borland visual gcc 2.96.
First, _users_ don't usually tweak with compiling. Second, just set a standard set of requirements/platforms (what you are doing now) and don't care about everything else. And third, it's just as likely that someone will come up with, "Hey, I know you don't support it, but I managed to compile on XYZ, here's the patch."
Can we stop treating this as a commercial project whose main aim is to maximise user base? I've been on such projects before, and they usually die a horrible death.
If a project has managed to gain a good user base, it doesn't already sound like "horrible death" to me, regardless of what lies ahead. Projects that die _without_ users look much more pitiful.
_________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2f...