involving community in project analysis (was RE: [cgl_discussion] linux-ha as a PoC for CCM.1 Cluster Communication Service)

Fleischer, Julie N julie.n.fleischer at
Thu Jul 24 12:49:23 PDT 2003

> From: Mika Kukkonen [mailto:mika at]
> ...
> CGL-WG is as good as it's members want/enable it to be, and 
> on this area
> it does not seem to be much, and I do not see any short term ways to
> improve it significantly.
> ...

I feel like we can move in this direction (i.e., involving the community with our analysis) as soon as we want.  I felt that initially we needed to do a first cut understanding the current state of all POC projects and determining where help would be needed in the CGL 2.0 timeframe.  Then, the next step would be figuring out how to get that help.

So, I felt that the effort on the project tracking list and then the top 10 (to highlight the projects needing help) was the necessary first step.

After the F2F, we now have a list of projects needing resources (or needing to be tracked) in the CGL 2.0 timeframe.  My impression was for most projects (like AEM, TIPC, OpenHPI) we would easily be able to track them via the POC because POC participants are active (or work with those active) on these projects.  Then, there are some projects (like message queues) where we most likely should involve the community before starting something on our own.

I don't have my notes from the F2F today, but as early as tomorrow I could start looking at the list of projects we have and find the ones where we'd benefit from contacting the community before removing it from our list of consideration (would be like the "top 10 for community participation list"), and we could start from that.  I would also be willing to start contacting people if the POC agreed.

- Julie

**These views are not necessarily those of my employer.**

More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list