Re: First draft of "OROCOS II" proposal...

I think that I can take all your arguments. The bottom line of your 
position is that there must be high quality in design.

[...]
> So, the project has a core which is responsible for design. That will
> be as open as possible can. The same thing was/is true for Orocos-I,
> but this experience proves that I am right: the amount of feedback on
> all the design issues that have been posted on the orocos mailinglist
> (not just by Leuven, Stockholm or Toulouse, but also by others such as
> Ulm) has generated _negligable_ feedback...
> 

[...]

> 2- "One cannot code from the ground up in bazaar style"
>> "One can test, debug and improve in bazaar style, but it would be
>> very hard to originate a project in bazaar mode. Linus didn't try
>> it. Your nascent developer community needs to have something
>> runnable and testable to play with."
> 
> And the step before that is even more indispensable: good design.
> 
> The controls field is now sufficiently mature that these designs are
> not revolutionary: there are tons of systems that work already, and
> that work fine. The project's goals are: to learn from these successes,
> to decouple generic stuff from application-dependent things, to refactor
> existing solutions, and to add new designs where needed.


I have a concluding remark. You maintain that this can only be achieved 
by (requoting):
> a core which is responsible for design.

Now the question is: how long will the design workpackages last? Will 
they release early and often, so as to enable community development?

Stefano

-- 
  Stefano Caselli
  Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell'Informazione
  University of Parma