Re: [alliance] Dead ?

[Edwin Velds <E.Velds@balpol.tudelft.nl>]

Presteign wrote:
> 
> At 09:01 PM 10/23/00 Edwin Velds wrote:
> 
> >If the project is to survive, there must at least be *some* progress.
> >Once there is some evidence of progress, more people will join in.
> >However, I do think we need a slight change in strategy. I think you'll
> >agree that we proved to be unable to let go of certain areas. When there
> >was a discussion about the user interface, everybody joined in. When
> >there was a discussion about the graphics kernel, everybody was there.
> 
> I found the UISK discussions were of great value, but we became mired in
> endless semantic discussions.

They have been interesting indeed. But they also consumed a lot of time,
so it must have detracted from work that could have been done in other
key areas.

> 
> >Which lead to a situation where we spent far to much time on the mailing
> >lists. In the future we need more focus on what's important at this
> >stage. Someone qualified should choose a few areas of focus to work on
> >while we mostly ignore the rest. We should strive to always have
> >progress in these areas of focus, if we can't maintain that, then I
> >truly think that the project is doomed.
> 
> Maybe "empowered"? Daniel was right. We're just hackers. I think all any of
> us can really do is moderate. I've continued to refine my designs unaided
> in my spare time...I'm sure one of these days they'll we worthy of review,
> but in the meantime, I'm always listening.
> 
> Since we are all living with time limitations, maybe we should try to
> devote at least a little time to dicussion on these lists. I think a very
> vital part of collaboration is the communication of ideas.

Agreed. A little communication will help to keep things alive and going
forward.

> 
> I must say here that some of my own research is leading me into areas where
> I've hitherto stayed away from, for instance the realm of module loading
> and object composition. I'm not a "kernel guy", but its looking more and
> more like I need to be.
> 
> So..
> 
> My own writings about the user interface are reaching the point where I
> need something to conduct research on, are we anywhere close to having
> experimental functionality?
> 

I don't think there is enough functionality for an experimental
platform. But it does point out where our key focus needs to be. We
should at least have steady progress towards an working experimental
platform for SKs and LMs. Some input from the "kernel guys" would be
welcome.

Edwin
-
Alliance:	http://www.allos.org/
Archive:	http://humbolt.nl.linux.org/lists/