On 12/5/05, robert burrell donkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/5/05, Jeremy Boynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Roy T.Fielding wrote: > > > > > > No, the proposal is all about SOA. What you are saying is that the > > > *actual plan* is about SCA. What I am saying is that the proposal > > > needs to match the actual plan, preferably a plan that is actionable, > > > rather than a statement of how happy the SOA community may someday be. > > > > > > I think everyone understands that now, yet nobody has updated the wiki. > > > There's no rush, I guess, but I do want to be clear that an e-mail > > > exchange is not the same as recording a mission statement that people > > > outside the proposal authors will understand. > > > > I held off making changes as I thought discussing a moving target would > > be confusing. I have now updated the proposal on the wiki expanding the > > Rationale section to indicate that we will be implementing the SCA > > specifications starting from an initial contribution. > > [ ... ] > personally speaking, I'd prefer something more declarative with a new and > better first paragraph. it's hard to build a community around a project > which takes three paragraphs to get to the point. IMHO the first two > paragraphs reads (to me) more like justifying a business case and less like > a call to arms for developers ;)
I've rewritten the rationale to be substantially more direct: http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/TuscanyProposal Robert's point is well taken, as we've been socializing this idea in various circles and justifying a business case was definitely a part of some of those discussions. I understand that is not the primary concern here and should probably have dealt with that earlier, mea culpa. Roy, does this address your concerns over excessive vagueness and lack of a crisp statement of a common development goal? k --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
