Interview With Jonathan Wainwright (AKA Waindigo) - The Sequel

Lisa

Chaotically Proportional
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
27,488
I think when a developer releases something and a bug is found in it - a genuine bug in the addon and not caused by another third-party addon - then it's down to the developer to fix that bug free of charge. If it's a feature request, then of course, a developer should have the right to ask for payment to add it. But bug-fixing something that you've coded. I honestly don't think it's right to charge for fixing a bug in a released product.

Maybe that's a simplistic view - I'm no developer - but I know if I coded something and it didn't work as it was supposed to, then the onus would be on me to fix it.
 

Jon W

Developer
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
53
I think when a developer releases something and a bug is found in it - a genuine bug in the addon and not caused by another third-party addon - then it's down to the developer to fix that bug free of charge. If it's a feature request, then of course, a developer should have the right to ask for payment to add it. But bug-fixing something that you've coded. I honestly don't think it's right to charge for fixing a bug in a released product.

Maybe that's a simplistic view - I'm no developer - but I know if I coded something and it didn't work as it was supposed to, then the onus would be on me to fix it.
What if it turns out that a small feature of an add-on is no longer feasible? Does the onus lie with the developer to come up with a way of doing that feature no matter what, or do you think perhaps it would be more reasonable to just turn off that feature and possibly offer a partial refund or something?
 

Lisa

Chaotically Proportional
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
27,488
What if it turns out that a small feature of an add-on is no longer feasible? Does the onus lie with the developer to come up with a way of doing that feature no matter what, or do you think perhaps it would be more reasonable to just turn off that feature and possibly offer a partial refund or something?
Would something not being feasible anymore be classed as a bug though? I think it would depend on the reason it's no longer feasible. If it's a case of the feature having become part of the main software - then I'd just remove it. If it's not feasible due to poor coding of the addon (I'm not insinuating that you have a poor-coded design, as I said I'm no developer) then I'd say it's again on the developer to fix.
 

Alpha1

Administrator
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
4,045
Sorry, I take back what I said. The point still remains though that the add-ons wouldn't be there at all if it wasn't for the people who contributed towards them.
Thats true.
Sometimes there are issues that mean it is not always true that people get exactly what they think they've asked for. I'm happy to be judged on past performance and I do believe it is true in the majority of cases that the add-on works for the person who contributed (or it did at the time they contributed), but I also make mistakes.
Your fee is quite steep. In my opinion your customers should receive software that runs bug free on their websites. Unfortunately that is not always the case and some of your addons can not be run without significant problems.
I do remember that you received particularly bad service as you were a customer around the time that the company went bust, so I'm really sorry about that. It got sorted in the end though, right?
Yes, the same thing happened repeatedly where you were quick to answer if I asked for quotes, but after receiving funds you went unresponsive for many months until I started to post about it in public.
Some of the addons received several dozens of bug fixes but still didn't work properly. There still are open projects that I paid for, but I gave up on it because the projects do not result in the quality I need and expect. I am also very much worried about the security of your addons. You should really work on your quality control.

Now with the above said, this may paint a very negative image of you. So I'd like to add that you have always communicated kindly and the massive amount of addons you have added to the xenforo community is something I can respect. Many people enjoy your addons.
 

ozzy47

Tazmanian Master
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
8,989
What if it turns out that a small feature of an add-on is no longer feasible? Does the onus lie with the developer to come up with a way of doing that feature no matter what, or do you think perhaps it would be more reasonable to just turn off that feature and possibly offer a partial refund or something?

Well it comes down to this. When you release a mod, either you support it, or you don't. If you support it, and there is bugs found, you should fix them.

I have 94 unique releases, and 143 total mods released. When someone reports a bug, I fix it as soon as possible. For feature requests, I try to get those in when I can, and if I feel it is feasible, and benefit alot of the users that are running the mod.

If it is unsupported, then just leave it alone.

I do all this by my self, and have yet to charge anyone for any of my mods.
 

TrixieTang

Politically Incorrect
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
8,500
It was a little while later before I properly asked her out on a date, and then three months later I proposed, on Easter Sunday. As God intended it, marriage is supposed to be a picture of the relationship between Jesus and his church – Jesus, the loving husband, and his church, the submissive wife. That’s why, for example, gay marriage doesn't quite work from a biblical perspective (i.e., two Jesus’s or two churches).

Jesus never really struck me as being the dom in that relationship. :cautious:
 

JordanH

Imperial Majesty
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
324
We are asking people to donate the amount of which they feel the software is worth to them. If the software is worthless to them, then they won't be using it so this is a use case that doesn't exist.

I thought it was pay what they can afford not pay what they think it's worth. Which is two completely different scenarios

Every site is different though, so we ask that sites just pay whatever they can afford.
 

Russ

Administrator
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
1,384
I thought it was pay what they can afford not pay what they think it's worth. Which is two completely different scenarios

It's what they can afford, but if it's not enough then don't expect any kind of support unless he has free time.
 

zappaDPJ

Administrator
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,597
As God intended it, marriage is supposed to be a picture of the relationship between Jesus and his church – Jesus, the loving husband, and his church, the submissive wife.

What exactly are you saying? That by your creed your wife should be submissive? Or have I completely misinterpreted things?
 

Testing123

eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
498
What exactly are you saying? That by your creed your wife should be submissive? Or have I completely misinterpreted things?

(I hope you won’t mind me stepping in here for a moment.)

If you read Ephesians 5:22-24, it’s pretty clear:

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.​

Maybe you’re confusing submission with oppression? Submission is an act of the will; a result of a conscious decision. It can never be forced on anyone. Either a person submits of their own free will or they do not.

Oppression is the act of extracting something from a person against their will. Submission and oppression are thus opposite qualities of a relationship.

The Bible does not ask a man to oppress his wife. In fact, just the opposite. He is asked to love her.

The very next verse, Ephesians 5:25 says:

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her​

The word love in the Greek is an interesting one. In modern-day English we have only one word for various types of love. However, the Greeks had at least 4 different meanings and thus used at least 4 different words for the one word we call love. You can find out more here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

In verse 25, God talks about the man’s role in the relationship, equates it with Jesus and does so with the Greek word for love, ‘agape.’

What does agape mean? Well, consider the following verse:

John 3:16

16 For God so loved (agape) the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.​

This agape type of love is one in which the lover gives of him or herself completely, whether returned or not, even to the point of death.
This is God’s nature. The Bible says in 1John 4:8:

8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love (agape).​

It’s His nature. It’s who He is.

And, just as God so agape’d (not really a Greek spelling, but you get the idea) the world, man is told to agape his wife.

Ephesians 5:25:

25 Husbands, agape your wives, just as Christ agape’d the church and gave himself up for her​

I hope that answers your question.
 

Russ

Administrator
Joined
Oct 20, 2011
Messages
1,384
Plugin development and this just don't mix in my eyes. No matter who your CEO is religion should be respected but limited in the professional work environment.
 

Justin

*Insert witty title here*
Joined
Dec 5, 2011
Messages
1,780
This is a perfect example of how religion and business should not be forced together at times. I can respect the use of morals behind religion at times when a smart business owner uses it, but really a step too far here.
 

Nudaii

Adherent
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
351
In your opinion, True Christians live our beliefs in every aspect of our lives.

We can respect your right to your belief or lack of, so least people can do is respect ours.

If your own beliefs are so weak that we influence people so strongly.. that's hardly our fault now is it? ;)
 

zappaDPJ

Administrator
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
7,597
Maybe you’re confusing submission with oppression?

I don't think so, the word has a range of meanings from the benign i.e. the act of submitting something to something far more sinister i.e. being beaten into submission by an enemy. You say that submission is an act of will which I would partially agree with but it could equally be equated to an act of force.

The bottom line for me is I think the word used in the context of a relationship is wholly inappropriate in a modern society. 'Equality' would be my choice of word.
 

Lisa

Chaotically Proportional
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
27,488
I have to admit that reading "submissive wife" did get my back up a little, but I just put it down to wording and it not really meaning what it sounds like it means :)

Let's try not to turn this thread into a religious debate - it's a lose/lose for anyone who gets involved :)
 

Testing123

eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
498
I don't think so, the word has a range of meanings from the benign i.e. the act of submitting something to something far more sinister i.e. being beaten into submission by an enemy. You say that submission is an act of will which I would partially agree with but it could equally be equated to an act of force.

The bottom line for me is I think the word used in the context of a relationship is wholly inappropriate in a modern society. 'Equality' would be my choice of word.

I have heard the term used as you say above (beaten into submission), but the severity at that point would certainly transcend the passage exhorting husbands to love their wives.

And, it should be pointed out that the verse just prior to Ephesians 5:22 reads:

Ephesians 5:21

21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.​

So, both parties have equality in this aspect. :)
 

haqzore

Devotee
Joined
Dec 6, 2012
Messages
2,543
Let's try not to turn this thread into a religious debate - it's a lose/lose for anyone who gets involved :)
sorry, but the interview itself made that an impossibility. you're asking people to ignore a huge piece of context of the original interview.
 

Lisa

Chaotically Proportional
Joined
Jan 6, 2004
Messages
27,488
sorry, but the interview itself made that an impossibility. you're asking people to ignore a huge piece of context of the original interview.
No, I'm asking people to not get into a huge debate about it. :) Ask questions, by all means, just don't turn it into a huge "you're wrong!", "no, you're wrong!" circle of insanity.
 
Top