Once we've developed sort of a critical mass of vendors (Sun, WSO2, Microsoft, 
etc.) and a solid track record of releases (M1, M2...) I think documentation is 
the possibly next step for making Stonehenge really useful at a practical level 
to the average developer.

Currently the wiki does a good job of guiding developers through the setup and 
the knobs to turn to try out the various interop options.  So it's good at 
serving as evidence that interop is possible, but not yet useful at helping a 
developer how to accomplish interop in the edge cases.

The next level I'd like to see it go to would be short guides on various 
scenarios that get down to the nitty gritty and help a developer who is trying 
to achieve interop between two of the stacks get his job done quicker.  In each 
short guide, there might be a discussion of the interop issues, if any.  For 
example, maybe WCF defaults to using WS-Addressing when another stack doesn't 
support it or supports an older version of he spec.   We could point out any 
non-default configuration settings on one stack or the other to get things to 
talk.  I'd even like to consider having the binding itself right there in the 
document so the developer could cut and paste it into their solution and get 
running quickly.

I am coming at this from the point of view of having been a consultant doing 
Proof-of-Concept work with customers trying demonstrate interop, for example to 
get BizTalk using WCF to interop with Axis web services.  I was in that exact 
situation a year ago and struggled to find practical documentation to help me 
through it.

My vision is that the active participants who have built M1 and M2 would 
contribute to "seed" this guidance on the Wiki, with the hope that this useful 
material brings more developers to Stonehenge who will hopefully be motivated 
to contribute more after they have benefitted.

I would like other's thoughts on this direction.  Especially from the mentors.  
I don't know of another Apache project where the documentation is one of the 
main deliverables, but then Stonehenge is already pushing the boundaries of a 
typical Apache project.  We've gotten consensus that it's a reasonable and 
useful stretch so far, so to me the documentation is a natural outcome.

Thoughts?

Kent Brown |Senior Product Manager - Developer Platform Product Marketing | 
office: 425-538-2918 | cell: 425-677-5241

Reply via email to