I agree, but we need to be very careful to provide some inkling into what
the various categories really are. In some cases (looking at jira here), the
components/categories in there don't really capture mid-level details like
whether or not transitive dependency resolution is a PITA...while the rest
of artifact resolution might work really well. I'd like to see how the more
fine-grained categories test out, personally. Talking at the level of
whether or not artifact resolution as a whole is good or bad is a bit too
broad to help us focus our efforts, IMO.

Where shall the canonical category reference be, then?

-j

On 8/4/06, Jason van Zyl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hey John,

When talking about the specific feature questions I think that these
should align with the component in JIRA and the taxonomy we started
working on (that I never finished). But I think we're starting to
collect too many separate lists and we should create that list, and
flesh it out and base the questions on that. From feedback if the
features/categories/components change that's cool but I think we
should align them all if we're going to ask questions about them.

I sent the link to the survey to a few people and when we have a
first draft we can show it to everyone.

Jason.

On 4 Aug 06, at 6:44 PM 4 Aug 06, John Casey wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I've been talking with quite a few people in back channels about
> putting
> together a survey for the Maven user community, in order to see
> whether we
> can find out what features they find important or in dire need of
> attention.
> Then, we can (hopefully) use this information to help prioritize
> our work.
> The idea is to get the community involved more deeply...instead of
> simply
> using Maven, they can get involved with shaping its future in a
> very real
> way.
>
> To do this, I need all of your help. I've started a wiki page that
> explores
> some of the concepts that have come from the various discussions
> I've had
> with different developers over the past weeks:
>
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/MAVEN/Survey+for+Maven+2.1
> +requirements
>
> If anyone is interested in reading and giving feedback, I'd really
> appreciate it. At first, I'd like to focus on what types of
> information
> (broadly speaking) we want to gather from the user community. Keep
> in mind
> that we're trying to direct the effort that will go into Maven 2.1, so
> prioritizing work according to the intensity of pain and proportion
> of users
> feeling it is important.
>
> Once we've pretty well nailed down the subject matter of the
> survey, we can
> get into how to phrase individual questions in order to extract the
> most
> effective, useful information. When we have a first draft of the
> questions,
> I think it would be a great idea to let the users list see it and give
> feedback, before their answers are tallied. That way, if there are
> glaring
> omissions in the survey, users will have an opportunity to point
> them out.
> At the end of all this, we (users and developers) can all take the
> survey
> together - along with any non-users that we can attract via
> blogging, etc. -
> and see what we can learn about Maven in the wild.
>
> BTW, I mentioned giving this survey to non-users, and I believe
> this is
> critical, particularly for those who thought about using Maven, and
> decided
> against it. We need to know how Maven failed to meet their needs,
> in order
> to make Maven a better tool, IMO.
>
> Feel free to discuss here or on the wiki. I'll try to make sure the
> relevant
> points made here are captured on the wiki.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -john

Jason van Zyl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]


Reply via email to