[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hurd development model question
From: |
Thomas Schwinge |
Subject: |
Re: Hurd development model question |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Sep 2008 10:24:25 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.11 |
[Moved to the <bug-hurd@gnu.org> mailing list.]
Hello!
Matthew Ayres <solar.granulation@gmail.com>:
> This might seem odd, but my curiosity was aroused during a conversation
> yesterday. I was wondering if someone could tell me what development
> lifecycle is used in the Hurd project. I thought perhaps the Waterfall
> model might be a good choice for a microkernel system, but it doesn't look
> like waterfall.
I would say that most small- to medium-sized Free Software/Open Source
projects (and even a bunch of the real big ones) don't have a real
development model. Everybody simply does what he feels like working on.
Locate a thing YOU consider broken, or a functionality YOU consider
missing, then fix/implement it. And a set of maintainers tries to
coordinate that ``process'' a bit and tries to combine the individual
works into, for example, a new release. Whether this is an effective
process surely is a discussion on its own. But with only volunteer
workers you don't have much other possibilities, at least not until the
workers demand more steering/leadership from the maintainers.
I'm quite sure that enough PhD students (or other people) have written
nice articles about that.
My memory on those tries of development model categorizations is a bit
rusty, but instead of the Waterfall model, I think we're rather using
somthing incremental or iterative.
Of course, feel free to discuss this topic w.r.t. the Hurd!
Regards,
Thomas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature