Again, mind meld. MG
On Feb 14, 2011, at 2:45 AM, Dan Creswell wrote: > On 14 February 2011 10:02, Calum Shaw-Mackay > <calum.shawmac...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> On 14 Feb 2011, at 05:29, MICHAEL MCGRADY wrote: >> >>> I think that the original vision needs to be revisited and River needs to >> see if that vision has been realized or not. There might be no point in >> going further. Further and further and further is not the point. The point >> today is what is the point? >> >> I agree for the most part with this, but given that the Jini 2.1 starter >> kit was released over 5 years ago, and we're now looking to 2.1.2, I believe >> that without a clear roadmap, or indeed some ideas that can be explored, >> Jini will be going no further anyway. So I think my version is more like >> 'The point today is what has been stalling us?', and I understand the >> upheaval and the like with the move from Sun to Apache stewardship, but this >> alone cannot account for nearly five years of near stagnation. >> > > Can't account for stagnation? Oh, I think it can. No evangelists, no one > putting into systems (perhaps because they don't know how to), no bug > fixing, no removal of rough edges, no focus on packaging, no experienced > developers for the core and thus a need for training etc etc. > > >> The development arena of 5 years ago is different from the one of today, >> irrespective of the original vision, there has to be a view of how we make >> Jini and River relevant today, to drive adoption and new blood, and we >> cannot do this unless at least some part of the community is willing to look >> outside, see where the trends and issues are, and begin to discuss where >> River can augment or help with those trends and issues, and then at some >> point actually do it. >> >> > Observation: Many of the trends and issues today are related to how software > is built today. The way software is built today is no different from the way > it was being built upwards of a decade and a half ago. The only thing that > changed was the tools and they all do the same things as has been done > before just in a different way. > > Adoption: Why do you want to drive it? To what end? What's the big picture? > We can all play around in the weeds or invent new, long, detailed roadmaps > but so what? What's the big picture piece that shapes everything? > > Relevant: Relevant to whom? That target audience dictates the rules by which > you make yourself relevant. > > If you want to change the world, you make yourself relevant by doing > something different and convincing people. If all you want is adoption, well > you make Jini/River look like everything else but then you look like any > other old app server or framework. > > Personally, I see little point in debating the past or talking about > stagnation. I'd prefer to talk about what we'd qualify as success, then we > can figure out what we'll do about it and indeed who's interested in being > around to do it. Michael McGrady Chief Architect Topia Technology, Inc. Cel 1.253.720.3365 Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037 mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com
