1. socialism - monopoly of power in hands of state
2. capitalism - big problems with getting, distribution and sharing power
3. developlism - no problem with getting, sharing and distribution of
power on individual or organizational base
Hi Vladimir,
Your points are very interesting. FishCAT is developlism, we like cats
jump out to lead to recruit more cats to
test GlassFish. [1] is v3.1 wiki page, it has functional spec,
schedule, like cats to check it out.
Thanks,
Judy
[1]
http://wiki.glassfish.java.net/Wiki.jsp?page=PlanForGlassFish3.1
Vladimir Perlov wrote:
> Hi cats,
>
> > > But let me write some thing fun, the discussion here seems like a
> > > debate between socialism and capitalism :-)
>
> In some way it was looks like that.
> But it was useful to highlight our positions and motivations in wide
> scope and get to some common points.
> Also it moved us much closer to understanding that there are unlimited
> ways how we can proceed.
> I see this is one of the reason why Kristian have started to do some
> kind of classification work.
> Honestly, I love when he is doing it because it's creating some kind
> of solid perspective to the discussion.
> Only problem is that some part of it should be more polished and
> connected in some way with other parts and then put to vision/policy
> kind of document. Without it much of value will be lost.
> At this stage I will try to cut down on things related to comparing
> different business models and similar stuff.
> But we will need some kind of business model for this program anyway.
> It could be very primitive business model or very advanced
> one but in any case we will need to build it. Before I thought that we
> should define clearly some set of principals and similar stuff and
> only then move on.
>
> > There's a whole diverse bunch of
> > different approaches in my opinion, and none of them is better or
> > worse. ;)
>
> I'm sure there are a many bad approaches exists so we still should be
> careful in this regard.
> But I agree that a bunch of different and good approaches also waiting
> for the actions.
> So too early limit ourself with some kind of approaches could bad idea
> itself :)
>
> You know I'm reading several blogs with orientation to how to do
> online business and several times I read how important to see things
> from point of resolving problem. The main idea was that if you can
> resolve the other people problems you will have a big influence on
> them. The following quote from internet should illustrated my point:
>
> “the most important thing is that freelancers should view themselves
> as solution providers instead of just service providers.”
>
> So following this principle we should position ourself as solution
> provider to Glassfish team.
> After we will be able to resolve their problems we will have no
> problem to arrange with them some kind of trading agreement.
>
> > Thoughts? I wonder whether it would be worth setting up a table
> > enumerating various groups of stakeholders and their special
> > requirements to see who can do what?
>
> We also should be solution provider to the various groups that
> Kristian has tried to classified.
> That is one of the reason why it makes sense to do the groups table.
>
> > > debate between socialism and capitalism :-)
>
> Judy, conceptually level of the discussion time from time was exactly
> on this level.
> I kind of promised do not play much politics here so instead of
> starting to describe new kind of society I will make it short by going
> strictly from award/motivation perspective. Only one note. I pretty
> good know personally both systems :)
>
> 1. socialism - monopoly of power in hands of state
> 2. capitalism - big problems with getting, distribution and sharing
> power
> 3. developlism - no problem with getting, sharing and distribution
> of power on individual or organizational base
>
>
> As you can see no politics at all :)
>
> Best regards,
> Vladimir
>
> > Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 08:50:56 +0200
> > From: rink_at_planconnect.de
> > To: quality_at_glassfish.dev.java.net
> > Subject: Re: Request for comments : FishCAT, the way forward
> >
> > Folks;
> >
> > Am 30.06.2010 09:12, schrieb Judy Tang:
> > > But let me write some thing fun, the discussion here seems like a
> > > debate between socialism and capitalism :-)
> >
> > Oh well, hope this discussion didn't really appear to be something like
> > this. :) Actually, talking about things "fun": At the very least I
> > think "capitalism-vs.-socialism" (or systems clash on whichever level)
> > is the least thing it all is about... Possibly, people are into a thing
> > like FishCAT for a whole set of completely different reasons, including
> > being a personal stakeholder of the project (in example when
> > running/deploying applications on top of the system), being technically
> > enthusiastic and interested about things, considering communication and
> > collaboration in an open, "tech/geek" environment as fun to be had, or
> > maybe due to altruism as well. There's a whole diverse bunch of
> > different approaches in my opinion, and none of them is better or
> > worse. ;)
> >
> > Anyway, _final_ notes on that as far as I am concerned. Let's move
> > on. :)
> >
> >
> >
> > > 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.
> > [...]
> > > 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.
> >
> > True, IMO this should definitely be a part of FishCAT future direction.
> > However I was thinking a lot about the term of "CAT" as "community
> > acceptance test", lately, and do have a few thoughts on that...
> >
> > - Generally, given the very terminology, it seems a "test phase",
> > probably later in a software project development cycle, to figure out
> > whether (or not) a "community" is willing and ready to "accept" a piece
> > of technology, a product, ... in its present state and, if not, provide
> > feedback on why it is this way to make it better. I wonder how, all
> > along the GlassFish development process, this differs from objectives
> > and target group selection of, say, a Beta Testing program?
> >
> > - Given a "community", formed by whichever rules and motivations, each
> > person involved will have a very special set of requirements based upon
> > which (s)he will be willing (or not willing/ready) to "accept" the
> > given development state. Considering a few different kinds of
> > stakeholders that might be part of FishCAT are...
> >
> > - people who do consulting, training, coaching on top of GlassFish /
> > Java EE or write books / documentation on that issues,
> >
> > - people who sell and support applications which shall run inside a
> > "Java EE compliant" container,
> >
> > - people who are involved into other Java (EE) open source projects
> > and want their applications / libraries to work with GlassFish, too,
> >
> > - people who run and deploy "application bundles" or SaaS including a
> > Java EE container which eventually happens to be GlassFish given the
> > platform does all it needs,
> >
> > - people who run Java EE hosting environments for customers to run
> > their applications in and, consequently, require an application
> > server platform ready and capable of dealing with virtually all
> > kinds of Java EE applications out there,
> >
> > - spare time enthusiasts interested in the platform, ready and willing
> > to play with it (and eventually, in some parts, take it for a hard
> > test drive),
> >
> > - students which want to learn both about the internals of a Java EE
> > application server and, ideally, about how a professional, yet
> > close-to-community software development process works,
> >
> > - ... ?
> >
> > Each of these group of stakeholders is likely to have a different
> > (though not disjoint) set of requirements and, subsequently, criterias
> > making them (not) accept the platform in a Community Acceptance Test
> > procedure.
> >
> > - Likewise, there are different general areas of testing in which
> > acceptance might (not) be gained and, consequently, which should be
> > part of the testing, most notably...
> >
> > - runtime aspects -> including everything relating to using GlassFish
> > as a runtime and deployment platform for any kind of application no
> > matter whether critical or not,
> >
> > - management aspects -> including everything that relates to keeping
> > track of the server while running, like monitoring, logging,
> > debugging, general module / component / resource administration, ...
> >
> > - development aspects -> including everything related to building
> > applications targeted at running in this platform (like IDE tooling,
> > documentation, ease of testing in a local development
> > environment, ...),
> >
> > - documentation aspects -> including availability and quality of
> > documentation relating to any real-life aspects of the server
> > platform that might be of interest.
> >
> > - People will have different amounts of time at hand as well as
> > different intensities in which they can interact with the FishCAT
> > community:
> >
> > - Someone who is doing testing along deploying his/her applications to
> > GlassFish, making them run on the latest revision and communicating
> > only if encountering any issues along this road is likely to be
> > pretty quiet as soon as all the applications in question do as they
> > should in the new environment.
> >
> > - A student, in example, who is about to learn about software testing
> > and debugging will have lots of time at hand doing planned and
> > coordinated testing, trying to track down actual issues and
> > eventually figuring out how to fix them.
> >
> > - People doing Java EE coaching and consulting, eventually preparing
> > for moving to the new server platform, are likely to provide input
> > on a lot of things talking about ease-of-use and ease-of-development
> > on the platform.
> >
> > Thoughts? I wonder whether it would be worth setting up a table
> > enumerating various groups of stakeholders and their special
> > requirements to see who can do what?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > K.
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
> inbox. Learn more.
> <http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1>