Twitter and blogging won't help those who already use it, and those who don't 
use it yet won't want to spend their time reading regular updates. That said, 
it might be helpful for those who consider using it but haven't found the time 
or resolve to actually do it; but these will be more interested in what newbie 
Cayenne users have to say than in what the developers think is the newest and 
greatest.

What's important is to lower the entry barrier.
E.g. make Modeler intuitive to use and cover all aspects that could be 
reasonably modelled. (My experience, as just one data point: I toyed with it 
for half an afternoon and found it a bit hard to get a handle on it and on what 
features it actually supports. Another detail might be that the tool should 
announce itself with a phrase that allows people to decide what they can and 
can't expect it to do; for example, that it is not supposed to model everything 
that their database can, but everything that... well, no idea what exactly its 
area of expertise should be.)
The documentation is actually great as an overview. It touches everything one 
would ask when trying to determine what Cayenne can and cannot do. It is frugal 
with details though.

My advice would be to get Cayenne ahead. That's going to gain more followers 
than trying to do anything marketing-wise - the marketing that led to my 
current interest in Cayenne wasn't twitter feeds or blog posts, it was 
favorable mention in online articles.
What's important is what Cayenne can and what it cannot (or will not) do. 
Example projects would be nice; have a web service and a J2SE application (one 
of each kind). Have the example projects touch every complication once: 
long-running transactions, distributed commits, proxy objects, optimistic 
update conflicts. In the famous words of Linus Torvalds: "Words are cheap. Show 
me the code." (I have been bitten too many times by believing some project's 
overhyped self description. I bet a lot of developers out there share the 
experience, particularly those who are in a position to advocate an 
architectural switch. Nothing that the developers could write will help 
overcome that scepticism; only working code will, and it won't convince, at 
best it will lower the barrier. I, for an example, still haven't committed to 
Cayenne; the kinds of problems that show up in the mailing list are currently 
making me a bit more sceptical. I'm simply not prepared to spend several 
person-months on an experiment that may fail, my time budget does not allow 
this (unfortunately, I'd love to try Cayenne out).)

Regards,
Jo

Reply via email to