Ask HN: Less-than-good code quality for initial open source release?

4 points by calebgilbert 12y ago ↗ HN

I've been working for several months on a project which I'll be open sourcing. There's a fully functional prototype, but the code quality of this prototype is really, really rough. (e.g., this was my first full-blown JavaScript project)

A total rewrite, which I've already started, will take 2-3 months. In the meantime I want to a) have something tangible to show for my efforts so far (e.g., I'm actually looking for work at the moment), as well as to receive feedback about the general idea of the project itself.

I'm strongly considering posting code for the working prototype on Github now along with mentioning that it is being rewritten. Is this feasible/recommendable, or would I be doing more harm than good by releasing with less-than-great initial code quality?

5 comments

[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 22.9 ms ] thread

onion2k 12y ago ↗

A full-rewrite might take 2-3 months, but that doesn't mean you can't release bits of it incrementally as you refactor them. Release what you have now as version 0, and then release minor version updates as you rewrite. That's what I'd do.

calebgilbert 12y ago ↗

Thanks for your comments. That's along the lines of what I'm thinking of, but want a few objective opinions as a sanity check.

creature 12y ago ↗

Working code is way better than broken code. And there's the aphorism of "If you're not embarrassed by your initial release, you're launching too late." I say release now; if nothing else, it should drive you to improve what you've got.

davidyoung604 12y ago ↗

Agreed. Some is better than none, and fugly code is better than no code. As long as you have a clear mention that you're working to improve the code's quality, most (competent) people should respect that.

calebgilbert 12y ago ↗

Thanks for the feedback and the push, guys - I'm going to go for it! (and have already started taking the next steps to do so)