Rough Cuts
Is it me or has the quality of content on this site dropped a little over the past year or so? Blogging aside, let's take the last few articles I've managed to write. We have to go back as far as July last year to find one I'd consider noteworthy (Faking Action Bars With CSS). Since then I've not written an article that I honestly thought would go down well with you all.
I maintain this site for the same reason I started it almost six years ago - I want to share my knowledge with others. However, my own circumstances have changed somewhat since I began. While I still have the same zest with which I began I just don't have the same amount of spare time.
Until you've written technical articles it's hard to appreciate just how much time is involved in preparing each one. It's not just the writing. It's the screenshots and the sample download databases. All in all I'd say a decent length article with demo site can easily take a day to complete.
Anyway, I'm not looking for sympathy or making excuses. I'm just proposing a new way of maintaining the quality of content on this site.
Over the weekend I bought a PDF copy of a Ruby on Rails book from O'Reilly. This book is what they call a "Rough Cut". It's basically a work-in-progress draft book. Normally this would unavailable to the likes of us until the editor was completely happy and it went to print. Putting it our there sooner is a great idea. We get our hands on it early and they get feedback to help tailor the finished article.
What codestore needs is a Rough Cuts section. It already has a "draft articles" view, but that's hidden. What I propose to do it make this public and call it Rough Cuts, for want of a better name. Hopefully it will help me get better content to you in a more timely manner.
One of the things that puts me off starting an article is knowing how in-depth it will have to be and how long it will take to complete. While I have great ideas in my head and even the demo database to boot, you wouldn't normally get to see them for up to a year sometimes, while I get round to writing them up. With a Rough Cuts section I can sketch out the idea of each article and make the code available for download without delay.
It's my thinking that there are two types of reader on this site - those who just want to simply download and play (I fall in this category) and those who want their hand held and a step-by-step guide to follow. Rough Cuts will help the first group out and hopefully, indirectly, the second as well.
What do we think? Is this a good idea? How else could I improve the site? I'll try and get the first Rough Cut up here by the end of the week (there's some backend changes to make first).
Skip to the 
You can subscribe to an individual
We all appreciate how long it takes to get an article up together, I couldn't possibly find the time to keep a site fresh as you seem to. On the article front - quite honestly, I don't always read 100% of them anyway. I read what I need to, look at the demo and go from there. 'rough cuts' would be a cool and also allowing comments to the rough cuts may also make it quicker to get a full article out and start earlier than usual discussions on other uses, links to examples, refinements etc.
Great idea mate!
I usually follow "the step by step" way, but it would be helpful to get some info sooner. And comments usually have useful info that not only will complete the post, but will help you to edit or finish the article.
Nice, Jake. Go on.
your Rough Cuts section sounds to me pretty much like what others call a wiki.
Although I am not really a friend of wikis maybe it would help to finish your articles in less tim eand better quality.
The thing I dislike most in wikis is that the design often looks bad so that I don't like reading them...
Jake,
I think it would be a good idea. I would certainly read the rough cuts section to see what ideas are brewing
Could even encourage people to contribute comments at an earlier stage. Good thing?
Jono. That's what I though. I oftten wonder, while writing articles, whether people actually read them.
Jose. Aha. Maybe people do read them then. Nice to know.
Mark. It's not a wiki really. Wikis are editable by all. This new section on codestore won't be. It might look a mess but hopefully it will be enough to get the idea across and get early feedback.
Mike. Comments at any stage are always good.
Sounds like a good idea... but I'm assuming you get a bunch of emails after an article has been published with questions? I can imagine you possibly getting bombarded with emails because something isn't made clear in its rough form.
Jake: It's a great idea and will help the persons that like to take an idea and run with it. I'm all for it.
Craig: You're correct. Jake will probably get bombarded, but this might be a time for his readers to help him out a little too. If an idea/rough cut gets put up and someone runs with it, they can end up leading the Q & A.
Craig/Doug. In fact I get very little email about newly published articles. I can't imagine getting that many about a Rough Cut. There might be comments added to the article along the lines of "I can't get it to work", but these articles aren't ready for those readers who expect results straight-away. We'll have to see how it pans out.
Why not co-author articles with others? Divide and conquer to output the articles in significantly less time. Get 2-4 people on the same wave length, divide the work (writing, screen schots, article layout, sample downloads, etc..) and away you go. Let's show how this whole collaboration thing works!
You know I would jump on that. Writing articles can be a horse's arse sometimes with real life looming in the background.
Joel Spolsky of Joel on Software already does this to a certain extent - posts draft articles and then firms them up over time. It works well.
I like the comments early idea.
It will help get the content pulled together earlier and more easily for you. Plus, with past articles/blogs the comments that are offered often have ideas worth following up on.
I would happily use both a rather sketchy draft and a full-blown explaination version,
p.s. Well done on the romantic proposal scenario. Congratulations.
Jeff. The idea of co-authoring sounds great, but I can't imagine it working. This is demonstrated on the codestore wiki I made available for everybody to contribute to. Either there's a fear of wikis or people just don't want to play.
I think the WIKI is to "un-focused". There is a sort of immunity from responsibility if a person does not have a particular role defined for them. Whereas gathering a group of volunteers and outlining each role, would focus peoples efforts.
There are two seperate issues: one is the amount of work, and the other is the accuracy and breadth of the information. The first needs more people with alot of direction, the second needs more people but less direction. Which is more important to you? My gut tells me that 3-4 people with defined roles will give you a nice medium between the two.
Jake, your site is still awesome, even if you don't find so much time to write polished articles. A section with rough cuts is a great idea and I'm looking forward to see what you've been hiding - collaborating with 3-5 Domino hackers to write a super-duper article may be even better. A big thank you for all the knowledge you share.
I'd use a different name, because "Rough Cut" is an obscure expression for a non-english speaker like me... I think that "Drafts" is better because it is used everywhere in software products.
I think IBM should put you on their payroll! Your work helps many developers around the world make better use of the Lotus products. Not only that, you also help promote the product by standing by it, for the most part, while many of us think the solution might be to move away from Lotus. You show us how to tame Lotus', oten, kookie behaviors and make them work in a more familiar way. You're doing a service to IBM as much as you are for us!
So if I may be so brash, if Ed Brill is listenining... you've got one heck of a pitch man looking for help, what can ya do? :) Jake is busy, as we all are, and it is a true tribute to his dedication to the product that he has been doing this work for nothing more than to help others. His work is very valuable to your product and maybe some monetary support would help ensure his work continues.
Sorry if I am speaking out of line.
Jason O'Brien
Tastes are different.
As an obvious non-native english speaker, I find "rough cuts" absolutedly lovely. Its interesting what most unexpected trick moves serious experts in english language can do with it.
Thanks for the good idea for my next comment on bile-blog (if the "man" will post again :-) ).
Jason. Thanks! I don't get as much of this kind of feedback as I used to. It's the notes of praise like yours that help keep me going. Each one means just as much as an item of my wishlist, if not more.
I don't think IBM would "employ" me though. There must be a part of Ed Brill (if he still reads) that wishes I would just shut up.
Dedicated to helping people out, I am. Dedicated to the product, I am not.
Again, thanks. That's made my day already (I've just got up).
I think its fair to say that codestore visitors over the years all really appreciate your efforts with regard to content and in introducing new technologies. However, all links refer back to one product, maybe the direction and focus of the site should change too.
Maybe you should take a poll from the users who visit your site, why they visit, what they would like to see, if you supported a wider range of software technologies, maybe you would get more visitors and advertisers to help with the costs of this site.
I havn't developed with Domino / notes for about 10 years+, I only visit the site to see what's new, and what your up to.
In my opinion you don't need praise from IBM'ers, your talented enough to be independant... just ask yourself if IBM was a person would they be your best freind?
I've lost count the number of times I've got stuck with 'Doom-ino'. But coming here make it all seem worth it.
Jake ROCKS !
'nuff said