At 11:11 AM 10/10/2007 -0700, Philippe Bossut wrote:
I'm not questioning your track record and I didn't present the whole pictures of the people involved in the failing projects either (they also had a successful track record internally before taking over their own major overhaul projects). I'd say that, regardless of the track record of the people involved, management should be wary and track the progress of a project of that magnitude correctly.
Of course. I was mainly pointing out that my track record with Chandler largely *consists* of "major overhaul projects" -- and most of them have been based, one way or another, on implementing portions of my overall architecture vision for Chandler, first documented in early 2005. (As has been all my greenfield work.)
You could say we've been already been doing the refactoring in piecemeal fashion over the last two years. We've just run out of pieces that can easily be done on a one-off basis.
Anyway, since we agree on the need for visibility and accountability, there's no sense dragging this on further. I'm just trying to reassure you that I do in fact know what I'm doing. If you ask Grant, he'll tell you how quickly I'll cut off unproductive threads of design discussion and fall back to simpler or less ambitious approaches. Design as well as implementation, should be a risk-ordered process with fail-safes always in place, so that one is never left without a seat when the music stops. :)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
