"Judy can't do the writing because it's our job to decide what we can do
and how we can do it.", you are right Vladimir :-)
But let me write some thing fun, the discussion here seems like a debate
between socialism and capitalism :-)
How about we have some technical discussion on reviewing Richard's 3.1
FishCAT what to focus on, welcome all your suggestion/input!
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=FishCAT2010SecHalf
Current Focus for this FishCAT phase
Focus of FishCAT will be on testing GlassFish 3.1, but we may want to
check there are no regressions in 3.0.1 and verify that key bugs in 3.0
that were marked as fixed in 3.0.1 were indeed fixed correctly.
Focus Area : Testing GlassFish 3.1
* GlassFish Server Open Source Edition 3.1
<
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=PlanForGlassFish3.1>
Features available to test : None as yet
Please see points awarded for this type of test.
Focus Area : No regressions in 3.0.1
* GlassFish Server Open Source Edition 3.0.1
<
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=PlanForGlassFish3.0.1>
There are many issues fixed from 3.0 release. If you can prove
regression from version 3.0 to 3.0.1 or 3.1, please send a special
message to the quality alias with subject 'Regression proved!' and the
issue number. Please see points awarded for this type of test.
Focus Area : Verify that key bugs in 3.0 that were marked as
fixed in 3.0.1 were indeed fixed correctly.
Vladimir Perlov wrote:
> Hi Kristian,
> I have read both of your todays letters.
> And should say that you have moved the discussion for one level up.
> Getting from you so many smart and deep questions and suggestions keep
> my level of enthusiasm pretty high.
> I really sorry that today I don't have a time to keep up with you.
> It's too late now and I should go to sleep but tomorrow I will do my
> best to keep the pace.
> Take in account the fact that I'm not that productive writer as you are.
> English is my second language. Beside the Russian language I
> "perfectly" know only two other languages such as XML and JSON :)
> I believe that you should start to polish everything we discuss here
> in writing. Who else will be able to do it in fast and clear manner?
> Personally I'm not up to your level of writing skills and Richard
> seems don't like to write long letters ;)
> Judy can't do the writing because it's our job to decide what we can
> do and how we can do it.
> So what do you think?
>
> "he is also on NetBeans Community Docs programme,"
>
> It's a quote from your interview with Judy to highlight my point :)
>
> Best wishes,
> Vladimir
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 10:24:25 +0200
> > From: rink_at_planconnect.de
> > To: quality_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> > Subject: Re: Request for comments : FishCAT, the way forward
> >
> > Hi Vladimir;
> >
> > nice reading from you again. ;)
> >
> > > Hi Kristian,I'm sitting now on the bed and looks like I have one or
> > > two hours to fight with you a good fight :)We will see yet who is
> > > more stubborn you or me :)
> >
> > Let's see, indeed. :)
> >
> >
> >
> > > This is a good question, let me try to answer on it.It would be wrong
> > > to separate people from perspective of one project.For example you
> > > are fighting bugs inside of Glassfish and I'm fighting bugs inside of
> > > Netbeans.We both are using the projects. One day I will need
> > > desperately that Glassfish team very quickly fix some issue with the
> > > server.Because I didn't hunting for Glassfish before I don't have any
> > > influence on the team. So I'm stuck. And it's not fair because I did
> > > my share of volunteer job working with Netbeans team.You should
> > > understand that I don't have unlimited time on my hands to fight in
> > > all directions.
> >
> >
> > Hmmm, I finally get your point on that now, and I generally think you
> > are right about that. The "easy" answer would be: There is a difference
> > between being active in an open source community and having "mission
> > critical" support at hand (in terms of getting developer questions
> > answered / real-world project problems fixed in a reliable amount of
> > time). If interacting in an open-source environment, communication and
> > collaboration is sort of "loosely coupled", and you have to rely upon
> > the very idea that everyone (including you, hopefully) contributes as
> > good as (s)he can so in the end most questions will quickly be answered
> > if there are enough people around - this seems a simple matter of
> > probability and statistics. If you need a more "reliable" playing
> > ground, you'd be better off buying support with a pre-defined SLA.
> >
> > But this indeed is an impolite answer given someone is active in an
> > open-source community or project. But I am not sure whether there is a
> > better way of getting this problem resolved. To make this completely
> > "meaningful", it would end up with a model more or less like this:
> >
> > - As a developer, one is both sort of a "customer" and a "partner" of a
> > company involved with a project - in this case Oracle and has an
> > assigned account.
> >
> > - This "assigned account" is billed whenever the
> > "developer"/"partner"/"customer" is about to use services provided by
> > the company, according to rules and billing conditions that need to
> > be clear in advance. This procedure happens, getting back to your
> > initial suggestion, using "virtual money". To pay a bill, a "partner"
> > needs to have a sufficient account of "virtual money".
> >
> > - To fill the account of "virtual money", either real-world money
> > payment can be used (exchange real to "virtual" money), or the
> > "partner" can be active in some open-source environment (providing
> > bug descriptions, goin' through test cases, reviewing documentation,
> > that kind of stuff).
> >
> > Though this sounds sane, I see a couple of problems with that approach:
> > - At first, it is a general matter of business models, and I wonder
> > whether Oracle is up for such an approach (though it surely would be
> > nice :) ).
> >
> > - Then again, you immediately end up with a problem of
> > making things "measurable" again. How much does it cost to fix an
> > issue you reported, according to some official support billing
> > conditions? How much "virtual money" are you capable of earning doing
> > open source work? How much, in example, does "virtual money"
> > represent in terms of value compared to, say, an hour of work you
> > spent, billed and got paid for "in offline life"? If, by then, you
> > end up with earning, say, 10 dukes for filing a qualified bug report
> > and you know that, talking about mission critical support, fixing an
> > issue costs (the virtual-money-equivalent-of-) 500 dukes, you have
> > quite some way to go to get meaningful results out of that.
> >
> > - If talking about being rewarded with a decent amount of "virtual
> > money" for getting something done, it will either be not more than a
> > "symbolic reward" again unless there will be significantly more
> > strict conditions to be met (times for tests to be performed, quality
> > and detail level of bug reports to be posted, ...). Would you be
> > capable of, in example, postpone any other project work if FishCAT
> > required you to rebuild GlassFish and perform some relevant test
> > _immediately_ to get a meaningful reward in terms of "virtual money"?
> >
> >
> > I am not sure whether / how FishCAT in terms of Oracle organizational
> > structures is strong enough to, about that, establish a meaningful
> > environment for such a model, or whether it would be better to keep
> > things separated, to know the people involved with FishCAT are all kind
> > and friendly and doing the best they can to help you out in times of
> > need, knowing that in the end, given mission-critical requirements and
> > deadlines, it's all about a professional SLA and money? I am not sure
> > about that, honestly... Judy? ;)
> >
> > Lest to say: By now better than before I understand your point, but I
> > thoroughly wonder whether there is a way of addressing this
> > meaningfully. Wouldn't be bad, though. ;)
> >
> >
> > > You have mention before about some successful open source
> > > projects including Tomcat. I used before Tomcat in my work and I know
> > > it's not really a good example of successful project. It took years
> > > for the project to catch up with some new technologies and in current
> > > situation this kind of application server is good fit only to use in
> > > school project.
> >
> > Oh, no no no, SpringSource in example is pretty successful doing what
> > they do using tomcat, and they never really had a problem with "latest
> > technologies" - they always, in example, worked pretty well with the
> > latest and most "bleeding-edge" versions of Spring framework. Whether
> > or not this is your technological choice definitely is up to you. Many,
> > eventually way too many, environments successfully use tomcat in
> > productive setups, and they do that absolutely on intention,
> > re-iterating the fact that "Java EE is way too large and too bloated"
> > to be useful. I don't agree with that, but that doesn't change things.
> > Have a look at the Eclipse Developer Report
> >
> > http://www.eclipse.org/org/press-release/20100604_survey2010.php
> >
> > in example talking about...
> >
> > - people generally using open-source platforms as deployment
> > environment (including operating systems and database, not just
> > talking about development environments),
> >
> > - application server used in production environment (tomcat coming in
> > first, with GlassFish left at painfully low 3.9% ... :/ ),
> >
> > - open source maturity in general (which, asides that, is irritating to
> > see the large amount of people "using open source" but not
> > communicating back to the community in any way).
> >
> > However, talking about tomcat along the lines of "school projects" is
> > definitely a dangerous thing to do. ;)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > For me, nowadays open source projects looks like primitives tribes
> > > comparing to civilization.Even for barter activities tribes have
> > > nothing to use. It's just shame ;)Of course I see weakness of open
> > > source projects from economics and politics points of view.
> >
> > Well, okay, I accept your point of view on that, even though I can not
> > really share or agree with it. Some thoughts on that:
> >
> > - Looking at companies like IBM or RedHat, I see commercial entities
> > which are modestly to pretty successful and both are supporting and
> > promoting (at least partly, talking about IBMs involvement into the
> > Eclipse foundation or its GNU/Linux activities) open source
> > technologies. They wouldn't do right this if open source was all poor
> > and weak technology, would they? ;)
> >
> > - Imagine you are trying to start a small company about to provide
> > customers with service of doing custom application development and
> > integration. What would you do? Would you ask them to go for, say, an
> > Oracle WebLogic or an IBM WebSphere license first? Then, eventually,
> > these customers immediately would go to IBM and Oracle and also get
> > consulting and support there, and your company would be out of
> > business. So, would you try implementing an application server first?
> > This would keep you busy a couple of years in which you would have to
> > find some solid fundings without having an actual way of revenue
> > since, until your application server implementation is ready, you
> > don't have anything to offer to your customers. Difficult, as well.
> > What about, in example, adopting an open source framework based upon
> > standards (say, an open source Java EE 5 or 6 certified application
> > server), eventually supporting its original developers and offering
> > business and consulting on top of this platform? This way, both would
> > benefit - the application platform you chose would benefit from your
> > willingness to support it, to provide input and eventually funding,
> > your company would benefit from having a stable, reliable platform
> > infrastructure, and your customers would benefit from having
> > affordable consulting and services on top of a platform which, after
> > all based upon standards, can easily "scale up" given the need. At
> > least to me, this doesn't seem a business model too bad.
> >
> > - If comparing open source to tribes: Yes, why not. Another comparison
> > I tend to hear, once in a while, is the comparison of small, flexible
> > boats outperforming the large, heavyweight tankers. Just take a look
> > at the KDE desktop environment for Unix systems, especially at its
> > very infrastructure: Technically, this is definitely the most
> > innovative system out there to date. Despite some visual
> > shortcomings, this is what neither Apple nor Microsoft so far managed
> > to come up with. Microsoft could have if they eventually decided to
> > drop all the borked infrastructure and compatibility crap and build a
> > system all on top of .NET, but so far they didn't for whichever
> > reasons. This, tribe or not, is where open source excels in my
> > opinion: It's a way of unifying smart minds all across the world,
> > which are capable implementing things _and_ want to do that in an
> > environment not mainly driven by commercial and economic motivations
> > (which, asides all the need there is, of course always will limit the
> > technical quality of a solution as in the end it will be a
> > feature-vs.-cost decision). Plus, in open source you have some setup
> > way more prominent than in "proprietary" development: You have
> > developers which are users of their software, too, so they know best
> > what makes their stuff inefficient / hard to use. Throwing in users
> > who are willing to provide input like this is a certain way to make
> > things better.
> >
> > - Finally: Look at an ant population. A tribe, which indeed is
> > effective in what it does. :)
> >
> >
> > > is more stronger than yours.For example how you see that we can act
> > > as team if we have nothing to share. No common projects, no common
> > > infrastructure, no common points/dukes, no common goals.I don't see
> > > much point for people to join Fishcat.Why would they?
> >
> > No common goals? _That_ is exactly what I mean in my discussion to talk
> > about a rewarding system! ;) If the _only_ common goal attracting
> > people here is the goal of getting reward, I honestly question whether
> > these are the users to have around. The _common goal_ should be pretty
> > clear initially: Make GlassFish better. To do so, FishCAT should
> > attract people who are willing to agree with this common goal.
> >
> > Cheers & all the best,
> > Kristian
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dipl.-Ing.(BA) Kristian Rink * Software- und Systemingenieur
> > planConnect GmbH * Könneritzstr. 33 * 01067 Dresden
> > fon: 0351 215 203 71 * cell: 0176 2447 2771 * mail: rink_at_planconnect.de
> > Amtsgericht Dresden HRB: 20 015 * St.-Nr. FA DD I 201 / 116 / 05360
> > Geschäftsführer: Stefan Voß, Karl Stierstorfer
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: quality-unsubscribe_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> > For additional commands, e-mail: quality-help_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The New Busy is not the too busy. Combine all your e-mail accounts
> with Hotmail. Get busy.
> <http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multiaccount&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_4>