Re: [abc] nice paper! :)

Last message was about the paper .... no disagreements there ....

Now about the release ....

If I understand it correctly, Oege would like to stay at our 0.9x
status, and not rush for a 1.0 release, but concentrate on other things,
which I also agree are important.

That's ok with me if as long as it's a public 0.9x, i.e. I can give
people our URL (in a talk) and tell them to try it and report any
problems they have. Then it's just a matter of what we call
the "real" release. I think as long as the version number is < 1,
people should expect to have to report bugs.

I think for this status we could try do the relatively small items I have
on the Wiki TODO list.

However, I really do want people to be able to try it out and let us know
how they are getting along. So, we have to agree on the "public" status
of our 0.9x releases.

Cheers, Laurie

> I'm sorry, but I'm firmly of the opinion we're not ready for
> a release. Quite understandably, after the IBM visit we have
> slowed down a lot. Before we release, we should
>
> a) compile abc itself (so it is really possible to use aspects
> for extension if people want to do that - it's not just
> a fun meta-circular thing).
>
> b) compile atrack, or at least fix all the problems that
> Ondrej has found
>
> c) pepper the source with javadoc. It is very sparse at
> the moment, and I do not believe the source is of
> use outside our team in its present form.
>
> While I'm really happy with how far we've got, it is a fact
> that, even for a simple program like my ants viewer, there
> were several things that needed fixing in abc before it could
> be compiled. No pathological corner cases: a real program.
> We have to have more confidence that abc won't break on
> the first sizable example people try.
>
> Now of course we *could* race to bring out a release by CASCON,
> and if we're lucky we'll get real users and umpteen bug reports
> to fix that same week. Now we have to ask ourselves whether
> that is the best use of a team that is going to drop in manpower
> a lot as of next week, when term starts and several of the
> Oxford gang have to go back (at least part-time :-))
> to being undergrads.
>
> I think it is far more productive to get on quietly with
> a-c) above, the CC paper, and most importantly with re-weaving.
> That was the crucial idea that started all this in January;
> it got lost in the development fever but fortunately Ondrej
> insisted on getting back to it. We have to get it ready for
> PLDI. The realisation of re-weaving will underlie lots of our
> future plans, and it will be a big boost to our chances of
> continuing the project if we have demonstrated it works. I
> don't think a release would have the same impact.
>
> Sorry for a long email. Obviously it's important we make the
> right strategic step now, with the very limited resources we've
> got.
>
> -Oege
>
Received on Tue Sep 28 23:32:10 2004