On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 12:51:53AM -0500, Datatude wrote:
> On 01-07-2009 12:02 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
>> Ultimately, I believe development work is already fragmented enough  
>> with the existing number of projects, so I'd suggest stripping down  
>> the scope to measuring performance (as QA-ing performance again  
>> seriously overlaps with the QA project).
>>   
>
> I interpreted the proposal as directly addressing the fragmentation that  
> indeed seems to exist, by creating a unifying project centered around  
> performance issues. Such a group could maintain a broader overview of  
> reported problems with performance, and this might be very helpful in  
> coordinating and communicating information to and between the existing  
> programming groups. When it comes to the actual refactoring/rewriting of  
> code, certainly those who already have the strongest familiarity with  
> the 0's and 1's "under the hood" would be most qualified to make  
> performance-oriented mods.
>
Hi kazar,

agreed, conceptually - only that collab's project structure then
inevitably leads to a separate mailing list, membership/observer
state etc etc. It is my firm belief that performance considerations
are a central part of every development work, and therefore should
be discussed on d...@ooo, when not specific to one project. Having a
group constantly monitoring/assessing performance is of course
highly desirable, to keep people honest - but I fail to see the
advantage of a dedicated project-in-the-collab.net-sense with the
given (broad) scope. In fact, I see it as a disadvantage. ;)

> In my experience "more than one list" is already a reality even for  
> persons who, like myself, are only marginally involved ... and IMO is  
> not a deterring issue.
>
"It's bad already, let's make it worse"? ;)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to