On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Jameson "Chema" Quinn wrote:
|> 1. The datastore
|> 2. OS Updates
|> 3. File Sharing
|> 4. Activity Modification
|> 5. Bitfrost
|> 6. Power management
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:02 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
really surprisingly short. Each item on the list has been debated to a
stationary point over the last two years, so all that is left is to make
a
final decision for the engineers to execute. Each task could be
completed
or hugely improved by a single developer in a few months, provided that
we
do not allow changes to the requirements, and the developers are not
asked
to split their time and focus.
I do not believe that either of these statements is correct.
We are not lacking in decisions: we have substantially complete
designs; we are lacking implementation.
Each of your items is not the work of "a single developer in a few
months": solving these problems is realistically a year's work at
least, if we have a single developer working full time on each.
I have experience with numbers 1, 3, and 5, and am the principal person
responsible for 4 right now. I would say that 3 and 4 are definitely within
the "single dev in a few months" time frame; depending on the definition, 4
is in the "as soon as currently applied patches percolate into production"
time frame. The further work on 4 - already started - is in the area of
activity signatures, which is actually encroaching on 5. In a few full-time
months of a single developer, this would put 4 at a place which other
platforms could envy, and make concrete strides towards 5, to the point
where security would be better, not worse, than other modern platforms
(though I agree that there is plenty more work to fulfill the true promise
of Bitfrost).
I agree that 1 is not so simple; while a rockstar developer might be able to
solve all our problems in a two-month all-nighter, 6 months to a year is a
more realistic timeframe to get something really solid and stable.
I think the biggest issue with #1 (and what Ben was trying to point out)
isn't the amount of work needed to implement something, it's agreeing to
change from the existing approach, and what new approach to use. there
have been several different proposals, but until one of them is selected
there isn't going to be much work done on any of them.
David Lang
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
