Michael McGrady wrote: > See infra: > > > On Dec 20, 2008, at 3:13 AM, Dan Creswell wrote: > >> Well that comes across nice and patronising.... > > I have the utmost respect for the work done on JINI or I would not be > here. Obviously JINI was built by a talented bunch of people. However, > obviously there is a problem with JINI. JINI has failed to achieve its > promise. Also, the problem with JINI is not engineering. Obviously the
Prove it's not the engineering. Explain to me with clear reasoning why it's not about implementation of setup or configuration etc as Niclas has suggested. Seriously if we've screwed up at that level I want to know. > people involved on the project are preeminent engineers. The problem is > architecture. Bringing up this issue is not patronizing. If you don't > like it, sorry. But the topic has to be broached. See this is the problem - in your opinion it's architecture, in your opinion this topic must be broached and you seemingly require that I accept the point. You're entitled to your opinion, but you still haven't backed it up with fact and you admit that you haven't done your research. I was referring to your tone being patronizing, not your raising of the issue. You've read the cathedral and the bazaar and so have I. Suggesting that we all go off and read it in the style you did (and presumably on the assumption we haven't already read it and haven't take it on board) comes across badly. > >> >> >> I do think you should get off your high horse and consider changing your >> thinking and doing some reading of your own. > > Dan, this is not adult. > Alas your ego means you believe you are right and all else should bow down to your opinion that it's all about architecture. And this why once again you are attempting to deflect from the real debate by calling me a child. You have been repeatedly challenged to provide fact or even reasoned argument and failed to do so. >> >> >> You're acting very superior like you know it all, care to list your >> credentials to prove the point? > > I can state a point of view that relates to JINI and is different than > you without being attacked like this, i hope. I have to say from an You can state a point of view indeed but you must back it. Further you are "attacking" me and others when you say the things you do without backing them up with fact. Please stop putting yourself above all others and claiming to be the victim. You are victimising me and a few others with your repeated and unsupported assertions. Note that whilst I've argued a lot with Niclas I haven't called him out in the way I have you. What might be the difference? > architectural point of view this is not "know it all" but fairly > rudimentary. Anyway, at the risk of boring the list, here are a few of > my "credentials". > > A blurb abut what I do is at > http://www.topiatechnology.com/Page.aspx?nid=41. My last resume ws > about 30 pages long, so I will keep it short. > > My first work on computers began long, long before there was a computer > science division in any university. I built a computer for my senior > science project in 1960. My first engineering job after the United > States Naval Academy was in 1964 at James Ford Bell Research Center > (General Mills) in Golden Valley, MN, on a UNIVAC with Fortran working > on national transportation issues. > > My present principal tasks involve (1) work as principal investigator on > funded R&D for a product connecting the cross-domain, multi-level > security, networks for the GIG (Global Information Grid of the United > States DoD) and the NAS (FAA, SWIM, etc) as well as SESAR (European), > etc. on an Air Force SBIR (AF081-028) through the Air Force labs in > Rome, N.Y. and (2) work on INSCOM products. > Cool, what software have you written? > This year I presented papers you can buy through the IEEE at both the > DASC and the INCNS conferences entitled, respectively, Integration and > Management of Dynamic Systems > (http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/tocresult.jsp?isnumber=4702732&isYear=2008&count=135&page=1&ResultStart=25) > > and The Use of Mobile Object Technology in Net-Centric Systems > (http://i-cns.org/agenda/2008/). Since the IEEE holds the copyright on > these papers I cannot make them available to you. > >> >> >> Michael McGrady wrote: >>> I do think that a nice read of "The Cathedral and the Bizarre" would be >>> good for River enthusiasts right now. One thing that form first >>> function second (building a framework, application, etc. without client >>> input, pretty much all open source) must seek is constant feedback from >>> clients, user groups. Lack of interest is a huge signal that something >>> is wrong. This is especially so with a framework like JavaSpaces or >>> JINI that is supposed to have very wide applicability. > > I stand by this and want to note that it is pretty basic stuff relating > to open source. > I've read it and all the other related papers and this has little to support your argument which seems to go: (1) Jini failed to get adoption. (2) Therefore there is something wrong. (3) It's architectural because in your opinion the cohesion and coupling is wrong even though you are the first to admit you haven't spent much time with Jini/JavaSpaces. (4) This you claim is demonstrated by the fact that JavaSpaces relies on Jini for things like Entry. So I agree with (2), but after that we differ on what it is. I accept that the non-Jini world has a completely different mindset from mine and that we need to build some bridges. I am not ready to accept your assertion as yet. I have asked you repeatedly (as have others) to explain how you roll Entry into JavaSpaces and solve the problem when other services in Jini have a similar dependency on Entry. Which in terms of coupling and cohesion suggest there is some shared behaviour that ought to be consolidated into a core and built on top of by these different services. In conclusion, whilst the papers are relevant to building a successful opensource project they provide nothing to support your claim of an architectural issue. > Mike > > > Michael McGrady > Senior Engineer > Topia Technology, Inc. > 1.253.720.3365 > [email protected] > > > > >
