← Back to context

Comment by willm

1 month ago

Not saying there isn't room for improvement. This is the first release, and work is ongoing. But I can't predict everyone's assumptions. Everyone brings their own experiences to the table, and in 6 months of testing nobody has made assumptions you just did.

For instance, "toad run" takes a path to a directory and not a command (check the usage). You've made an incorrect assumption about how that works, based on previous assumptions on how the UI works.

I would be like to understand why you made the assumptions you did, and make changes based on your feedback. But you've chosen to be combative, for reasons known only to yourself.

For the record, I apologize for the "Mr cranky pants" quip. If you do want to improve this software, join the Discord. Let's keep it civil. Merry Xmas.

From someone who has not tried the software but might be interested if it gains traction:

You should decide whether you are building this for yourself or as a product to others. Each stance is perfectly valid but are somewhat not compatible, the software can be very opinionated or intuitive but attempts to be both seem to often fail.

If you are building opinionated software for yourself and are ok with alienating a part of the userbase: great, some great software are built this way! (Alacritty, Kakoune come to mind). This should be clearly communicated to prospecting users though, it may need to convey "this software has strong opinions you may not agree with, that's fine but it may not suit you" somehow.

If you aim for maximum reach: expect your sense of what is "intuitive" to constantly be challenged, and to have to make many difficult compromises. You also need to take feedback from a more forgiving angle, and above all, assume good faith from your users. In this instance, GP stated their enthusiasm for your shared vision of the problem space, and your knee-jerk reaction was calling them a troll.

Builders of opinionated software should pay trolls no heed and refrain from engaging, and builders for maximum reach should think trolls don't exist.

footnote: `toad run` expecting a folder and not a command seems to fall in the "opinionated" ballpark

> Everyone brings their own experiences to the table, and in 6 months of testing nobody has made assumptions you just did. < As an experiment, try disabling the app's mouse support and testing it.

> For instance, "toad run" takes a path to a directory and not a command (check the usage). < I stand corrected. I think I was confused because I read this comment <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46370722> ("toad acp COMMAND") and substituted "toad run COMMAND". I saw in the usage that it mentions "PATH" without specifying what it is the path to, and does include a "--agent" flag but with no explanation about what it does. This level of documentation is far from what I would call good, but I'll give it to you that I could have figured that one out. ([append] `toad run` isn't even the right command and as near as I can tell --agent does nothing. But `toad acp` is what I actually wanted and finally I can actually test the app)

> But you've chosen to be combative < My post was snarky but my experience was honest. I don't think I'm being combative. I certainly don't intend to offend you as the creator of the tool, regardless of whether or not I think the tool is high-quality in its current state.

Merry Christmas, I will continue to watch this project. Maybe I will open a discussion in the Github if I end up successfully able to use it with my newfound understanding of the "acp" subcommand.