| Re: [mpwg] Gap Analysis: Questions on Cost Estimation |
|
Christophe, Thank you for providing feedback to our report. Please find my comments below: No, this wouldn't be feasible. Even if we had enough funding it would not be realistic to assume that we could put a team of 24 people across different companies together and make sure that they collaborate in a coordinated and efficient way. There needs to be a significantly smaller group and some sort of ramp up to get this successfully started. It is sure that the current development teams will continue to do things in 2011 even if no funding at all would come from the Modeling Platform Working Group. But there wouldn't be any guarantee as to which extend these works would cover the Modeling Platform requirements and when the results would be shipped. The gap analysis, which is the first part of the planning study, indicates only the efforts that are required to be made regardless of who will finally take charge them and who will provide the necessary funding. In the second part of the planning study we will work on a roadmap in which we are going to address these aspects, i.e., which implementer companies would participate, which is the realistic number of resources that each of them could contribute, which of the prio 1 work packages could be realized, and which deliverables and milestones could be scheduled. But again, for the sake of providing a project plan that is realistic and executable, we cannot base it on results which may or may not be achieved in the open source space but is not really under our control. We are aware of this problem and therefore will think of a way of providing a useful result without requiring an investment as high as what the gap analysis currently indicates. The roadmap which we will ship by end of October will propose such a way. What do you mean by repository provider? Is it a model repository like CDO? Assuming that the answer to my question above it yes, I'd say that this requirement correspond to requirement 1.3 + E-Config-1 "Support for different model repository types" in A1 "Version Management" in the gap analysis spraedsheets. The detailed capabilities of this requirement explain what kind of repository types are to be addressed. Clearly yes. This includes the capacity of swichting between different model repository types as well as supporting model repositories, files-based SCMs or both in parallel. However, from other feedback which we have got so far we have concluded that this is not going to be a no 1 priority. The focus of the first iteration therefore would be on supporting one model repository type, namely CDO, and to some extend also file-based SCM systems. What we can learn from the gap analysis already now is that the gap between exisiting Eclipse modeling technology and the Modeling Platform requirements is pretty big (and maybe significantly bigger than many of us had hoped). It therefore will not be realistic to assume that ALL capabilities that are currently have a prio 1 can be realized within 2011. It will be unavoidable to make choices, i.e., reprioritize the prio 1 capabilities, and yes, decide which of them can be left to a later iteration. I all the same believe that it will be possible to identify a subset of the prio 1 capabilities that fits into the 2011 schedule and will make up something useful. We then would be able to work on that subset in a coordinated way and address success-critical aspects like consistent integration to a complete platform, system testing based on real world use cases, etc. in an appropriate manners. So, compared to trying to do more that what is achievable and ending up with nothing, we will eventually have more by doing less. Kind regards, Stephan _______________________________________________ mpwg mailing list mpwg@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/mpwg --
Dr. Stephan EBERLE ---------------------------------------------------------------- Product Development Manager
6 avenue de Verdun 92250 La Garenne Colombes, France
Phone : +33 (0)1.73.54.00.30 Fax : +33 (0)1.73.54.00.32 Mobile : +33 (0)6.64.18.39.10
E-mail : stephan.eberle@xxxxxxxxxxx www : http://www.geensys.com ---------------------------------------------------------------- |
