Merge or split [Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Source drop and bug database ]

[Mark Brouwer <ma...@cheiron.org>]

A new thread because I got lost.

Bob Scheifler wrote:
 > Mark Brouwer wrote:
 >> At least I can identify ServiceUI and the JTSK as completely
 >> independent
 >
 > While they have been independent, I don't see a good reason to keep
 > them separate going forward. $.02

It would be handy if you would be a bit more verbose Bob. I'm very
curious to know whether this opinion is influenced by a larger vision in
which you like/dislike splitting up the current JTSK in e.g. a platform,
service implementation, utility specifications, etc.

Personally I'm all in favor of decoupling as much as possible. I don't
see reason why the pace the ServiceUI specification and implementation
evolves should influence the evolution of the current JTSK.

I hate to see releases stall because others can't finish their work, or
that rush work is performed because the hot breath of those that want to
release.

So to me if there is no compelling reason to integrate I keep things
separate.
-- 
Mark

Re: Merge or split [Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Source drop and bug database ]

[Mark Brouwer <ma...@cheiron.org>]

Mark Brouwer wrote:

> It would be handy if you would be a bit more verbose Bob. I'm very
> curious to know whether this opinion is influenced by a larger vision in
> which you like/dislike splitting up the current JTSK in e.g. a platform,
> service implementation, utility specifications, etc.

Or if I may play the devils advocate, could it be that you think that
ServiceUI should be part of an emerging Jini Platform?

Giving that idea myself some thought I think there is something to say
for that [1], it would drag in a dependency on Swing, but given J2SE 1.4
currently as a minimum it is hard to see that as a roadblock though.

[1] it would ensure that the spec for ServiceUI which is heavily used
would stay lined up with the capabilities of the Platform. But due to
missing mailing list archives I don't know whether I'm talking nonsense
here.
-- 
Mark

Re: Merge or split [Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Source drop and bug database ]

[Mark Brouwer <ma...@cheiron.org>]

Bob Scheifler wrote:
> Mark Brouwer wrote:
>>  > While they have been independent, I don't see a good reason to keep
>>  > them separate going forward. $.02
>>
>> It would be handy if you would be a bit more verbose Bob. I'm very
>> curious to know whether this opinion is influenced by a larger vision in
>> which you like/dislike splitting up the current JTSK in e.g. a platform,
>> service implementation, utility specifications, etc.
> 
> Decomposing the starter kit into a bunch of independent distributions
> with independent releases is an utter waste of time and will just
> complicate life, IMO. (-17)

Thanks for being that clear, but I hope you realize you can't go lower
than -1 to express your disgust :-)
-- 
Mark

Re: Merge or split [Was: Re: [PROPOSAL] Source drop and bug database ]

[Bob Scheifler <Bo...@Sun.COM>]

Mark Brouwer wrote:
>  > While they have been independent, I don't see a good reason to keep
>  > them separate going forward. $.02
> 
> It would be handy if you would be a bit more verbose Bob. I'm very
> curious to know whether this opinion is influenced by a larger vision in
> which you like/dislike splitting up the current JTSK in e.g. a platform,
> service implementation, utility specifications, etc.

Decomposing the starter kit into a bunch of independent distributions
with independent releases is an utter waste of time and will just
complicate life, IMO. (-17) I'd much rather see our (limited) energy
spent on adding useful fixes and functionality.

- Bob