Why not starting that as part of a JBoss Project ? > -----Message d'origine----- > De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]De la part de Pete Beck > Envoy� : mercredi, 2 octobre 2002 11:27 > � : JBoss User > Objet : [JBoss-user] JBoss component library revisited > > > Sorry to drag this thread up again from the bowels of cyberspace, but I > think the idea is very promising. If this project seems like it will be > done well, I should be able to donate some web-space to the cause. > > There are a number of issues that must be sorted out first and I am sure > people will have their own viewpoints: > > o Licenses. At the risk of starting a religious war, how should the > components be licensed? I think using LGPL is probably the answer as it > may encourage companies to use the components and perhaps submit > improvements. If GPL is used, then it will impact projects which also > must use proprietary components. > > o Usability. One of the biggest barriers for people adopting open > source is how difficult it is to set up and configure. The project > should aim to zap these problems by producing first class documentation > and examples. I'm thinking along the lines of UML, javadoc, manuals for > compiling, extending, administrating etc. Of course there is also the > potential for revenue streams from printed documentation and > distributions. > > o Re-use of existing component libraries etc. As other people on the > list have protested, why re-invent the wheel? Of course, life is rarely > that simple. Using other component libraries etc. is likely to only be > possible if they follow the same standards, licenses, philosophy etc. > My experience has led me to believe that software tends to be less > re-usable than we pretend it is. > > o Professional quality. It should be an objective that the library > is production quality. I'm fed up with hearing that free software is > bad quality. This misunderstanding comes from peoples expectation that > free software behaves like software you pay for. The library should be > developed not only with technical objectives, but should also consider > the needs of its users. i.e. How can we make improvements without > breaking the systems our users have developed? Users shouldn't need to > search through mailing lists to understand how to configure a component > in a fairly standard way. > > o Development methodology. It would be nice if the core library was > developed using something like extreme programming. With free software, > people tend to make ad-hoc contributions, so that would have to be taken > into account. However key concepts such as iterative development, > release planning, user stories, unit testing and refactoring should be > possible. > > To me all of the above seems important regardless of what features the > component library would contain. I think the project itself would be > defined more by such standards, than by the contributed code. > > So, should we begin something on sourceforge? Anyone thought of a good > name? > > Thanks for your time. > > > -- > Peter Beck BEng (hons) - Managing Director, Electrostrata Ltd. > http://www.electrostrata.com --+-+-+-+-- Experts in e-business and > e-commerce > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek > Welcome to geek heaven. > http://thinkgeek.com/sf > _______________________________________________ > JBoss-user mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user >
------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ JBoss-user mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-user
