Robert Godfrey wrote:
OK - in general I think the biggest issue is that a lot of the discussion of
such things goes on "off list" (e.g. I wasn't aware of the Ruby generator
for C++ until a good deal of time after its existance). We should, I think,
decide whether we aim to have a single generating mechanism across
languages, and if so, what are the requirements of such a beast. Further I
think at some point we need to discuss exactly what commonality we expect
between the different modules of qpid. Currently I get the feeling that the
brokers and clients of each language are diverging in their designs and
APIs...
-- Rob
Rob,
I agree with you that there are clusters of guys that work / sit
together around the world working on qpid
and everyone that is in that situation (me included) should make a
greater effort in posting any water cooler
discussions to the list.
I also think we need to be pragmatic about getting things done/ debating
- one the one hand we could post
everything to the list and never code, on the other we can just code and
no-one know what is anyone else is doing....
There are quite a few examples of situations like this, like the
conversion to ShortString, the change
to velocity templates in the Java generator, use of automake, etc... and
then we have had some very
much debated things like maven that did not turn out that great... I
think the key part to this is not what
is being done but project wide visibility that it is being done.
I believe that we should all try to post our intentions before working
on something.
Suggestion:
---------------
One thing that might help is if we pick a day of the week and everyone
on the project posts what they are
going to do that week, or at the end of the week post everything that
they have done. That way it is easy
for everyone on the project to be able to ask about any work being done.
Thoughts..... would everyone support such a process?
Carl.
