+1 On Feb 1, 2011, at 6:35 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> Sim IJskes - QCG wrote: >>> On 01-02-11 12:40, Dan Creswell wrote: >>>> Ah, I know Sim is gonna hate this but I feel the need to retain full >>>> context >>>> for now.... >>> >>> What i would prefer to see is: >>> - a use case defining internet deployment >>> - a proof of concept prototype implementing this use case >>> - define lessons learned >>> >>> If it turns out that there is something in the lookup what needs >>> improvement, then we can change that. >>> >>> Better not use internet deployment in requirements discussions before whe >>> have defined what it is. Thats too vague for me. >> I agree. >> If implementing Internet deployment is either impossible regardless of the >> proposed changes, or can be done well without them, then making the changes >> would be a mistake. >> The easiest way to be sure about this is a use-case and proof of concept >> prototype. The prototype can be used to demonstrate how proposed River >> changes contribute to implementing the use-case. > > Note also that even current proposals are exactly right about what needs to > be changed in River for Internet deployment, this sequence does not make any > change in the total amount of work, just in the order in which it is done. > > The use-case is the core of a document explaining how to do Internet > deployment, and the proof-of-concept prototype is the foundation for the > example code we would need. > > Patricia
Michael McGrady Chief Architect Topia Technology, Inc. Cel 1.253.720.3365 Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037 mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com
