Hour X or better sooner than late! About one difficult decision

To be or not to be, that is the question

- worried about the hero of the Shakespearean play, and my head has recently been puzzled by other doubts.

Let me tell you more.

Introduction

A self-taught programmer who is engaged in self-education at the expense of information on the Internet is forced to deal with hundreds of opinions on a given occasion and amid this “information noise” try to form one’s own.
')
For myself, I had to answer the question - when to display a constructed site for sharing?

No, let's say a landing page with a subscription form for opening a site, counters and an accounting system I did for half a night (in the afternoon I work on the main work that has nothing to do with programming), but that site that should do all the work is “just” quickly fail ...

Flour of creativity

I have a self-written engine of the site, I even came up with a name for it - Kangaroo, that is, Kangaroo in Russian, so the work of some modules has to be thoroughly worked out, which takes extra time. I specifically refused ready-made CMS in favor of a self-written engine for acquiring full control over the work and getting better results in comparison with popular free and paid solutions.

One fine evening, I caught myself thinking that programming is such a fascinating thing that one and the same "chip" of the site can be beaten with several variants of code, and it is so delaying as it removes the output of at least some ready-made solution that would like everything 100%.



A vicious circle - you do something, then look at it, find flaws, break everything “nafig” and do it in a new way, look from the side and again ...

Surfing the internet, I read this opinion -

you can’t publish in public what is a raw product, you just initially will form a negative opinion among visitors and just lose such clients forever.

The opposite opinion that I met -

The endless "lick" and "polishing" of the product delays its natural testing in real conditions and increases the chances of making useless functionality to anyone. In other words, if the published site suits you completely, it means that you published it late.

Final choice

You know, I feel closer to the second option, and for myself I answered my question like this - the site needs to be publicized now!

More than half of the functionality lies in the raw code, and is not available for use. Then I'll finish it.

The disadvantages of such a solution (a little): there are people who, as expected, recognized the site as ugly and weak.

Advantages of the solution (there are many of them): now, apart from bare words and a printed business proposal to suppliers, I now have a real website which I show to shop owners. Now when I meet with them, I am already discussing not ghostly opportunities, but real and accessible tools.

Stepping over my own ego and the desire to have a beautiful and multifunctional site, I forced myself to separate the wheat from the chaff and form a core from which you can already push off.

It seems to me that this is not enough ... thank you for your attention

PS would I be honored to hear your opinions on this - to bring to publication only a 100% ready site or to “cut” MVP (minimally working product) and jump into the depths of the Internet with it?