I like the questions (aside maybe from the cost one which perhaps does
not matter much here), especially since they encourage explaining
things in a more plain language than generally used by specs.

But I don't think we can ignore design aspects; it's been my
observation that a good portion of SPIPs, when proposed, already have
at the very least some sort of implementation (even if it's a barely
working p.o.c.), so it would also be good to have that information up
front if it's available.

(So I guess I'm just repeating Sean's reply.)

On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:23 AM Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote:
>
> I helped craft the current SPIP template last year. I was recently 
> (re-)introduced to the Heilmeier Catechism, a set of questions DARPA 
> developed to evaluate proposals. The set of questions are:
>
> - What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no 
> jargon.
> - How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?
> - What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?
> - Who cares? If you are successful, what difference will it make?
> - What are the risks?
> - How much will it cost?
> - How long will it take?
> - What are the mid-term and final “exams” to check for success?
>
> When I read the above list, it resonates really well because they are almost 
> always the same set of questions I ask myself and others before I decide 
> whether something is worth doing. In some ways, our SPIP template tries to 
> capture some of these (e.g. target persona), but are not as explicit and well 
> articulated.
>
> What do people think about replacing the current SPIP template with the above?
>
> At a high level, I think the Heilmeier's Catechism emphasizes less about the 
> "how", and more the "why" and "what", which is what I'd argue SPIPs should be 
> about. The hows should be left in design docs for larger projects.
>
>


-- 
Marcelo

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org

Reply via email to