Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rt-pmc] RT projects and standards

> Well, I guess this gives a start (although it's a little out of date...i.e. doesn't have anything about ECF's ongoing RSA implementation yet):  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSGi_Specification_Implementations

Yup that is a good start for OSGi-related specs.  We'll need to see information from other projects as well to see what their interests/concerns are around other specs/standards.  So the thinking was that you start a wiki page at eclipse.org for the ECF stuff.  Then other project folks can add their info related to whatever specs they care about.  Once we see a good cross-section of info we can start talking about exact form.

Question: are you only interested in standards implementations or is it interesting to know about standards "use"? That is, ECF implements the remote services spec but it also adapts or enables ZeroConf, XMPP, ...  Seems like understand this would be interesting from a consumer point of view.  ECF feels like an ideal prototype project for this kind of info.

> It might help if the rt-pmc made the appropriate noises once or twice...on behalf of all RT projects...rather than the individual projects having to make noise (and waste a lot of time and effort doing so) repeatedly and individually.

FWIW I do ping them on the topic (and others) from time to time.

> AFAIK these aren't related to anything to do with standards, but that's a side issue.

Project collaboration issues are quite separate from standards use/implementation.  If I understood your general goals it was to make it easier for people to understand and consume what the projects produce.  The cited collaborations are focused on exactly that.  IMHO there is nothing sacred about standards when it comes to collaboration. 

>> Can you be more concrete on what your ideal policy would be in this area?
> 
> My ideal policy:  that RT projects that are doing the same thing technically (for ECF it's remote services and RSA) don't actively or passively ignore other RT project's work (or other standards work), reimplement the same specs for no other reason than nih and/or commercial, product, control, ignorance, or personal concerns.  I know such 'management' is not what the pmc, rt projects, or EF has done before...but I suppose that's the point.

If asked I would have said that that matches the current "policy".  Projects are encouraged to collaborate.  That means, don't ignore each other.  However, what is not said in your statement or the current policy is what happens when projects choose different paths.  That is, MUST projects collaborate?  It'll be very hard to drive that model.  Even something that says say the PMC reviews/guides will be hard.  Great, we review and think that a project should do something different.  Ultimately no we can't make you are anyone else do something they don't want to or see no value in.  

To me the best way to drive the collaborative approach is by example.  That's why I mentioned the other collaborations that are going on. You scratch my back and someone scratches yours.  I don't think that you can mandate it from the outside.  

That's just my 2c.  I'm more than happy to hear other people's point of view.

Jeff

Back to the top