| Re: [rt-pmc] Re: Swordfish review slides |
RT PMC members,
The Swordfish project has sent in some slides for a 1.0 release review. In reviewing these slides, I note the following items which make me wonder how involved the PMC has been in preparing this project. Specifically, two issues:
- The Larger Eclipse Community: the purpose of these reviews is to explain the project and it's status to the larger Eclipse community. The review is not just a checklist of hoops to jump through. For example:
- Schedule: the purpose of listing the schedule is to demonstrate to the larger community the project's ability to set a schedule and to meet the schedule. Thus the schedule page in the docuware needs to list the actual planned milestones and planned dates and actual dates. Not just first and last milestones: all of them, with details.
- Standards: the purpose of listing the standards is to explain to the community what standards the project is implementing and tracking. Thus the statement "strives to be standards compliant" is not good enough.
- ...etc...
- Maturity for a 1.0 Release: it's hard for me to see the project as ready for a 1.0 release given that:
- All the API is provisional. That could be ok except that there's no plan for hardening the API and thus one wonders whether proper care has been put into the API design. The purpose of "provisional API" is not to allow projects to avoid spending the effort to create good APIs - rather, the purpose is to allow an "almost completed" API to be road tested with actual clients before be finalized.
- The project only supports one messaging engine. It's hard to claim that something is a framework if it doesn't have at least two, preferably three uses/users.
- I also note that the PMC has not yet approved this release. The PMC is supposed to approve releases before they are sent to the EMO.
I'm inclined to say "no" to this release review unless you all on the PMC can explain why I'm wrong here. Thanks.
- Bjorn