----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt Sergeant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kermit Tensmeyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 12:20 PM Subject: Re: deprecate XPS
> On Saturday, Feb 1, 2003, at 18:02 Europe/London, Kermit Tensmeyer > wrote: > > > They went for an IIS based ASP SqlServer solution instead. I didn't > > take the project. Yes it went over budget, and still isn't delivered > > properly > > and no they aren't satisfied. The technical manager at this point won't > > consider Apache and/or Tomcat as better alternatives for his problem. > > Most of the perl programmers have left for greener pastures. the good > > ones left early. > > Yep XPathScript scared him away... > > There are dozens of examples of projects that you could say "It would > have worked if you'd have used X" or "Y scared him away". Just insert > Perl for X or Y and it'll be a familiar story to most people here. I > don't see people suggesting we drop our use of Perl though. > > AxKit is a toolkit (it's part of the name!). As part of a toolkit we > provide lots of tools, and we'll be looking to add more in 1.7 (PeTaL > and STX processors), not remove any. _I_ think you ought to keep XPathScript around. After all 'there is more than one way to do it'. I've seen a lot more associated tools around AxKit lately. Perhaps maybe we just need more recipes for implementation of just the simple tasks, to make it easier for the non-initiated to make in roads on implementation details. In retrospect, this customer was already predisposed to using perl and apache (heck I'd already talked them into using modperl.) The fear came because of the presentation of the material, not because of any thing actually to do with implementing the product it self. ( he knew much more about perl than he did XML. But the XML side of the house convinced him that it was too hard,and that they would be locked into one way of doing it. and that way didn't include java or cocoon. A little ignorance about the capabilities of perl and xml was easier remedied with a web visit to the documentation side of CPAN. (my counter argument at the time was that it would be easy to hire some real specialist who 'understood' AxKit.) sometimes it becomes difficult to find 'consultants/slaves/employees' who are already familiar with the tools that one has in current use. That wasn't the first project that I seen selected on the basis of measuring the difficulty of maintained and on-going support. MS ASP programmers are a dime a dozen, java people are almost as plentiful. There are lot's of people who tell me that they are perl experts. Nope this project direction was chosen so that it wasn't bleeding edge and that ongoing support was more likely when the designers had moved on.. ;-( Nope I think we ought to keep PathScript around as one -good- way to get things done. Providing XSLT delivery is a good way to get the stuff in the door. Improving an existing solution with new tools like XPS is just gravy on the meat.. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
