brainwane: The last page of the zine (cat)
brainwane ([personal profile] brainwane) wrote in [site community profile] dw_dev 2016-12-29 07:18 pm (UTC)

I do not hack on Dreamwidth and only have a passing familiarity with the nuts and bolts of the architecture, so I had not realized how much effort y'all had been putting into supporting forkers/competitors. (And, I speculate, into making it easier for feature improvements and bug fixes to (under ideal conditions) flow back and forth between LJ and DW.) Your new suggested approach sounds like a good one to me, as a way to make the lives of actually-existing and likely-to-exist Dreamwidth developers easier and more productive.

The extreme version of this approach, as I see it, is: "You can only expect to run the software in this one configuration because we have taken out all the options we don't use for". So, how far are you interested in going in that direction? Or, to put it another way, what options do you think should still remain optional?

Post a comment in response:

Identity URL: 
Account name:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.


If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at

Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.