[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [ormf-dev] The way forward
|
Hello everyone,
As I just got back from my extended holliday ( I think this will be the last year that I will afford such a long holiday :( ) it took me a while to read all the messages that were exchanged during this time but I'm happy to see that progress has been done during this time. Because the following issue is still debated here I will say my opinion on the issue:
>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:
- >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.
- >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.
I agree to the fact that it would be more difficult to create the long term architecture immediately but the project would benefit more if we take this path because as it was already stated before we would have
a product that wouldn't change so often and a community of users would be easier to maintain. So +1 for the long term architecture approach :D .
Regarding the other issue raised by Joel regarding the CQs I will read more into these because at the time being I don't understand everything that it involves and if I think that my contribution would be benefic I will volunteer for the task :).So I'll get back on you on this. On the mean time if you have any advice that would help me clarify this issue it would be most welcome.
Best regards,
Vasile
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
