+1 to Sean's comment On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote: > Yup all good points. One way I've done it in the past is to have an appendix > section for design sketch, as an expansion to the question "- What is new in > your approach and why do you think it will be successful?" > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 12:47 PM Marcelo Vanzin > <van...@cloudera.com.invalid> wrote: >> >> I like the questions (aside maybe from the cost one which perhaps does >> not matter much here), especially since they encourage explaining >> things in a more plain language than generally used by specs. >> >> But I don't think we can ignore design aspects; it's been my >> observation that a good portion of SPIPs, when proposed, already have >> at the very least some sort of implementation (even if it's a barely >> working p.o.c.), so it would also be good to have that information up >> front if it's available. >> >> (So I guess I'm just repeating Sean's reply.) >> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 11:23 AM Reynold Xin <r...@databricks.com> wrote: >> > >> > I helped craft the current SPIP template last year. I was recently >> > (re-)introduced to the Heilmeier Catechism, a set of questions DARPA >> > developed to evaluate proposals. The set of questions are: >> > >> > - What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely >> > no jargon. >> > - How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice? >> > - What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be >> > successful? >> > - Who cares? If you are successful, what difference will it make? >> > - What are the risks? >> > - How much will it cost? >> > - How long will it take? >> > - What are the mid-term and final “exams” to check for success? >> > >> > When I read the above list, it resonates really well because they are >> > almost always the same set of questions I ask myself and others before I >> > decide whether something is worth doing. In some ways, our SPIP template >> > tries to capture some of these (e.g. target persona), but are not as >> > explicit and well articulated. >> > >> > What do people think about replacing the current SPIP template with the >> > above? >> > >> > At a high level, I think the Heilmeier's Catechism emphasizes less about >> > the "how", and more the "why" and "what", which is what I'd argue SPIPs >> > should be about. The hows should be left in design docs for larger >> > projects. >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Marcelo >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org >> >
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
