technical road map

[Pierre-Jules Tremblay]

Perhaps a "roadmap" such as the one Sander is suggesting would
not be as necessary as it is if everyone kept the discussion public.

I applaud the fact that very recently the debate has been taken to
samba-technical, but I can't help but notice replies quoting messages
that I've *never* seen before on the list (caveat emptor - perhaps this
is partly due to the recent ORBS problem?).

Don't you guys think samba has gotten a little big a project in all
respects to just "wing it" (without roadmaps) ?

Jeremy keeps praising the virtues of Samba as an
Open Source project.  I haven't read the bible on Open Source
recently, but in my mind it isn't just about getting bug reports for free.
It should also be about sharing ideas/discussions about important
issues in an open forum, and throwing a roadmap to the mob once in a
while to see what you can reel in from it.  I'm not suggesting everyone
stops writing code until a global consensus occurs, as that would be
disastrous.  I mean this can all occur in parallel.

If Andrew and Jeremy don't have time for this, well that is truly a shame.
Certainly casts a bit of a dark cloud on the whole thing.

Pierre


At 08:49 AM 8/22/2000 +0200, Sander Striker wrote:
> >> Agreed. I guess the decision on daemons or libraries has
> >> slipped my mind. I think it makes sense to do a publication
> >> of some kind of technical roadmap, at least for HEAD, at
> >> certain intervals (each month?).
> >
> >I doubt anyone has time for that frequent a roadmap,
>[...]
>
>Well, I think there should be made a little time for it.
>It's always nice to know where things are going, which points
>are still valid and which have been dismissed. Also, this
>will probably not take up enormous amounts of time. An
>hour a month tops. Just the headlines, some detail (not
>to the bare bone). Consider this is for a part of the
>audience and part of the team, the only way to keep up to
>date about the direction samba is going.
>
>Sander
>
>PS. A report/insight like the one you posted seems to be
>what I'm aiming for (it also leeds to discussion on points
>that aren't clear _and_ sometimes mistakes can be caught
>before implementing them :-).

---
Pierre-Jules Tremblay, ing.		Cortex Machina Corp.
Chief Research Engineer		942-460 Ste-Catherine W.
trep at cortexmachina.com		Montreal, Canada H3B 1A7
(514) 395-9059 ext. 206		http://www.cortexmachina.com