[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ormf-dev] The way forward

Hi all,

I'd like to clarify my position on the work ahead. I have to distinguish between to opinions, both my own:

a) What would be the best from a technical point of view? Of course we should go for the necessary changes and work on an improved architecture. We should replace all sub-optimal components and create the greatest tool/API ever.

b) What will work? I've once told Joel not to be polite when clear words are needed, so I will do it myself: I don't think there is a team yet. B. and Joel have done a great amount of work, I myself have contributed some time, Wolfgang has shared some thoughts. That's it, no other participation I have noticed. From my experience a group of people working together in the same location need a few weeks to form a "team". Since most of us haven't met in person I thing it will take some more time before we should approach some big challenges. I would invest a month or two on "wasted development" to get the team working and to get to know the initial ORMF contribution (a.k.a. Useme).

As an alternative B. and Joel (as the only ones with an in-depth knowledge of ORMF) could make some proposals and the rest of us could work out the details and start the implementation. This would place a great burden on our Etish committers who also have to earn a living.

I can certainly live with (and actually like) the approach favored by B., Joel and Wolfgang. I just don't believe it will work with the amount of commitment shown by the team so far.


P.S.: I think the above is also a rational for my proposal of replacing Jaxen instead of going for EMF. I'd love to do the latter but I'm not sure if we would ever reach this goal.

Joel Rosi-Schwartz wrote:
We do not have unanimous agreement on the direction forward. Barbara, Wolfgang and I are of the opinion that we should dive in and create the long term architecture immediately. Achim is for the more gradual approach of first completing Useme "as is" then taking on a gradual re-engineering. Ben and Vasile have not expressed opinions. Under normal circumstances I would be tempted to simply call for a vote, but there are two good reasons that I would prefer if we could discuss this out until we have everyone in agreement:

1. There are good sound reasons (arguments) for both approaches
and I think that all of us have come to our conclusions after
pondering the pros and cons.
2. This decision will obviously drive the deliverables for the
project for the foreseeable future, so it will have a
significant overall impact.

I do not think we need to reiterate all of the points here. I do want to state, though, that we really do understand Achim's point

    /For the time being I'd prefer that we start doing minor tasks until
    a "real team" is established. I'd like to see some initial version
    in the SVN repository. We should start making this version work (by
    replacing invalid parts and fixing bugs). This should train the team
    using distributed development tools and methods and to know each
    others strength and weaknesses./

We simply do not believe that there is any long term value in doing that work. Wolfgang's remark to the extent that the community is unlikely to spend any time looking at (no less really using) a tool that will not be supported in the near future is accurate. So what does the project gain from releasing this? I would like to point out the even the ORMF team has not seen the value in exercising Useme. The smallest hurdle of having to install another JRE stopped everyone :-( We also have had several other interested parties who requested access, but as soon as they understood it would not be released "as-is" their interest dissipated and they never tried it. I am anxious to get out a minimal release based on an architecture that will evolve.

Achim, I am also curious as to to why you changed you mind about Jaxen vs. EMF. At first you stated "switch to EMF (which I would prefer)", but now you seem to have turned 180.

We look forward to everyone's thoughts and comments.

All the best,
B. & me


ormf-dev mailing list

-- BREDEX GmbH Mauernstr. 33 38100 Braunschweig

Tel.: +49-531-24330-0
Fax:  +49-531-24330-99
http: www.bredex.de

Geschäftsführer: Hans-J. Brede, Achim Lörke, Ulrich Obst
Amtsgericht Braunschweig HRB 2450
fn;quoted-printable:Achim L=C3=B6rke
org:Bredex GmbH
adr;quoted-printable:;;Mauernstra=C3=9Fe 33;Braunschweig;;38100;Germany
tel;work:+49 (531) 24330-0
tel;fax:+49 (531) 24330-99

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature