[TYPO3-dev] FLOW3 / TYPO3 5.0

[Irene Höppner]

Hi Ries,

maybe we should give this thread another subject again (or move to another  
mailinglist) ;-))

>> They have no idea how long 18 minutes are.
>
> I think they do after all, they didn't set down and do nothing. They got  
> on the task.

yes, but not because of the 18 minutes, but because of the funny game.
>
>> They probably didn't take any care of this constraint -> no  
>> (time-)pressure for them, they just play around with their ideas.
>> Once money is introduced (it's getting serious, not a game anymore,  
>> pressure is real), not any of the groups gets a result (without former  
>> training).
>
> They do get results as pointed out, just not so great as they hoped for  
> :) They think to long before they actually build something.

Yes, that was the explanation, why some groups are slower than others  
(when just playing around).
But after telling something about a 10.000,- dollar reward (things become  
really serious...), all towers were *zero*. Quotation: "Not one team had a  
standing structure." Have a look at about 04:50.

> As clearly shown, when they are called back 6 months later they do a lot  
> better.
>>
>> Well, that's not was this video intentionally was about, but it again  
>> shows that pressure is something you should deal very carefully with.
>
> Pressure is not the issue, they do good in the second trial with the  
> same presure (18 minutes).

Yes, pressure is good for simple tasks. What do you think, was the  
prototyping in the second trial about?
Probably it was about things like: how many spaghetti should be on each  
level? How long should they be? At least for the groups who new how to  
build a tower already. So, that's no candle-light-problem anymore. It's a  
candle-light-problem-for-dummies then (In that part I don't agree with Tom  
Wujec btw. - he should have used another game after that 4 months, so the  
i-know-how-to-build-a-tower-knowledge wouldn't have an effect on the  
results.) :-).

But again: This video is not about pressure or deadlines. If it was, they  
would have to analyze two groups: one with pressure and one without. Or  
one with more pressure and one with less pressure.

> The point is to make faster iterations rater then trying to engineer the  
> best, and then see it fall apart at the moment.
> That is what the other comparable frameworks did.
>
>>
>> The video is about how important prototyping and playing around with  
>> things is to get good results. All I saw in the FLOW3 development is,  
>> that that's exactly what they do. But working like that means, that you  
>> have to break down the tower again and again to make it better the next  
>> time. And ppl who just have a look at it every minute and then say: hey  
>> there is no tower, you must be on the wrong way... well... :-)
>
> The points is that kids are far more creative when under pressure ;)

How can you know it from this video? That wasn't compared in this video.  
How were the results of kids under pressure and how where the results  
without pressure? There are no kids-groups "with pressure" and compared to  
that kids-groups "without pressure". So how comes this conclusion?

> Second, it's seems to be better to bring out a couple prototypes
> then making the best framework by thinking about it for a long period
> of times and see it collapse when put in production, not saying that  
> FLOW3
> will collapse. As robert pointed out, no serious application
> was developed except his blog and possible few other tryouts, I don't  
> know.

Erm... there is released prototype number eight around. Developers should  
be able to checkout subversion, so they have several prototypes every  
day...
Robert and Karsten are asking like hell for ppl trying out the  
prototypes... for months now... minimum last year developer days... how  
many tryouts did you do?
(/me should have done much more, than I did... *blush*)