I don't think there should be a line.
But it should be considered fair to say that some things are over-engineered in relation to others.
It should also be considered ok to call things over-engineered. OP himself did.
But it should be considered fair to say that some things are over-engineered in relation to others.
It should also be considered ok to call things over-engineered. OP himself did.
Once you start that, you also need to stop somewhere. For example, we could even question the need for a door in the first place. Not saying that we should, but if you want to take over defining other people's requirements, you're putting this on yourself.
So if you don't want somebody else to call you out for over engineering somebody else's requirements, where do you stop?
It's not an enviable position to be in. :)
Some other people mentioned the doorbell project was over-engineering and I just agreed with them.
So I don't agree that you can call mrb's basic wireless doorbell "overengineered" for requirements reasons alone without opening yourself up to the same scrutiny that you're applying to him.
Then we are in agreement!
The person who originally called it "overengineered" wasn't me, it was another user.
I did joke that an electric doorbel "does a similar job" but that was to demonstrate that "similar" is also a judgement call.
I am just saying that lukeify or anyone can call it overengineered from their point of view, similar to how GP called commercial products overengineered.