[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[DotGNU]Design working group (was: Re: DotGNU Business Alliance)

From: Peter Minten
Subject: [DotGNU]Design working group (was: Re: DotGNU Business Alliance)
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:03:05 +0200


I send this to the developers mailing list because the content of this mail has
to do with the design of DotGNU and not with our business plans.

For the people that don't read bizplan here is a short intro to what this mail
is about:
At some point in a discussion about DotGNU's business plans NB mentioned
important things that aren't getting done without offering people a decent
salary. I asked him what things he meant, his answer is quoted.

Norbert Bollow wrote:
> Specifically, I've been thinking of
> - designing SEE, especially how to efficiently exchange data
>   between different VMs.

This is indeed a major point. 

> - designing tools and libs for achieving great end-user
>   usability with DotGNU.

Also very important. 

I believe that the big problem with DotGNU that we are too concentrated on
building our programs and other stuff that we can do now that we don't look
ahead in the future enough. 

But I don't believe that attracting developers from outside will solve this
problem, we need to put up a 'Design of DotGNU' working group to create the
overall picture of DotGNU when finished. I imagine this working group taking
stock of what we need, what is done and what needs to be done. Then it can
produce a model of how all the parts work together. This model will then be
worked out into a design of how parts should function. Once the model is worked
out and we have a good understanding of how the system works the design of
end-user tools and libs can be started.

The auth working group is the first step in the process of creating an overall
DotGNU design, but we really need a design working group that goes beyond
different parts and looks at the big picture. The design group should include
developers from all parts of DotGNU (see list under this paragraph). Also it
would be nice if some of the more active parts get a working group of their own.
In the ideal situation every part would have a working group and would have one
or two representatives of that working group in the design working group. 

I see 6 major parts in DotGNU:
* Execution enviroments (SEE, VRS)
* Authorization systems (FrePort, IDSec, macs)
* Basic programming tools and libraries (PNet, DG-Base)
* Extension libs (dotgnu.xml, dotgnu.sql,
* Webservices (Forum, PHP-Groupware)
* Documentation (the book and website and stuff)

These parts have working groups:
* Execution enviroments: No working group that I know of.
* Authorization systems: Active working group.
* Basic programming tools and libraries: Pnet's irc meetings have created
something like an unofficial working group (basically the lead team plus some
* Extension libs: No own active working group.
* Webservices: No working group since there are too little projects in this
field to start one.
* Documentation: No working group, this field could do without a working group
since the website and the book don't have much in common.

The whole working group system may complicate the organization of DotGNU a
little bit but as we can see from the Auth working group it's a great way to get
things working. 



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]