James Carlson wrote: >Darren Reed writes: > >>I'd like to see a project plan that covers more than just a single >>document. This looks like an ongoing project but the current >>scope doesn't reflect that and nor does it extend its vision >>beyond just a single task. >> > >This is the first document. It's an itch that needs to be scratched. >Other likely documents include the long-sought Fireengine detailed >design, and perhaps one about sockfs. Heck, there even could be an >iphooks user document here. >
I'm with you 100% here. >> I find it very hard to believe that >>there is only demand for a single document about Solaris >>Networking Architecture/design/code - and even then only >>a single interface. >> > >I doubt there is demand for just one document; it's likely many more. > And again, I agree completely. >That's why this is chartered as a project with a repository: it gives >us a stable place to put these documents. > So this might be thought of as two projects in one: one to create a repository and one to deliver a single document. >For what it's worth, it's modeled after the existing SMF documentation >project: for exactly the same reasons. > And is there any reason why we have to limit ourselves to what they're doing? >>Solaris Networking *needs* more commitment to this than just >>a single document and if that isn't forthcoming, I'm prepared to >>give this a -1 until someone comes up with a schedule that shows >>some more thought has gone into what is needed here than just >>a reaction to some internal emails about GLDv3. >> > >It sounds like you're saying that we aren't allowed to get started on >our long-awaited detailed documentation simply because we're not >proposing to document the world from the get-go. > No, I don't want to see this project result in a one off effort. And I don't want to see this problem (documentation) forgotten after the GLDv3 document is delivered. As you've recognised higher up, there is quite likely demand for more documents than just this. At the very least, this project should be able to say it will be responsible for adding documentation for both the volo and pfhooks projects as they're both aiming to deliver programming interfaces for networking in the Solaris kernel. There may even be some work related to xbow as well. If you want to call this the "GLDv3 Documentation Project", then I'd be happy to say yes to what's proposed, but it's being called the "Network Documentation" project, so I'm expecting more than just GLDv3. To call this project "Network Documentation" and just deliver GLDv3 documentation seems like some sort of cruel joke that makes us look like fools (IMHO.) Other deliverables that should be considered: - standard templates for use with staroffice and other applications to facilitate ongoing production of documents (or at least drafts) by project teams; - recognition that future projects that deliver APIs into Solaris Networking can be considered incomplete without a deliverable that includes a submission into this archive. Is "Network Documentation" complete with just a GLDv3 document, with or without a respository? No. And without scope to make it complete, it is hard to find reason to +1 it as is. Darren _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
