river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MICHAEL MCGRADY <mmcgr...@topiatechnology.com>
Subject Re: MarshalledServiceItem
Date Tue, 01 Feb 2011 15:32:57 GMT
+1
On Feb 1, 2011, at 6:35 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:

> Patricia Shanahan wrote:
>> Sim IJskes - QCG wrote:
>>> On 01-02-11 12:40, Dan Creswell wrote:
>>>> Ah, I know Sim is gonna hate this but I feel the need to retain full context
>>>> for now....
>>> 
>>> What i would prefer to see is:
>>> - a use case defining internet deployment
>>> - a proof of concept prototype implementing this use case
>>> - define lessons learned
>>> 
>>> If it turns out that there is something in the lookup what needs improvement,
then we can change that.
>>> 
>>> Better not use internet deployment in requirements discussions before whe have
defined what it is. Thats too vague for me.
>> I agree.
>> If implementing Internet deployment is either impossible regardless of the proposed
changes, or can be done well without them, then making the changes would be a mistake.
>> The easiest way to be sure about this is a use-case and proof of concept prototype.
The prototype can be used to demonstrate how proposed River changes contribute to implementing
the use-case.
> 
> Note also that even current proposals are exactly right about what needs to be changed
in River for Internet deployment, this sequence does not make any change in the total amount
of work, just in the order in which it is done.
> 
> The use-case is the core of a document explaining how to do Internet deployment, and
the proof-of-concept prototype is the foundation for the example code we would need.
> 
> Patricia

Michael McGrady
Chief Architect
Topia Technology, Inc.
Cel 1.253.720.3365
Work 1.253.572.9712 extension 2037
mmcgrady@topiatechnology.com




Mime
View raw message