re: Forming a SOC review committee

[Dan Kegel]

Dimi wrote:
> One thing that I would like to see is to establish a more
> formal post-mortem for every project accepted. ...

Sounds good to me.  It can even be a condition
of completion (and thus of payment).
- Dan

--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv

Forming a SOC review committee

[Dimi Paun]

On Wed, April 19, 2006 10:32 am, Dan Kegel said:
> Sounds good to me.  It can even be a condition
> of completion (and thus of payment).

Absolutely. I think a fundamental portion of the value
derived from someone investigating a topic is the context
gained by the person. Lots of times it is more important than
the code that is generated. If we don't get a full and
accurate dump (in the form of a post-mortem) we lose that
context, which means that a lot of the effort is wasted,
and moreover, the chances of someone continuing the work
are drastically diminished.

The end result is significant lower value for Wine. This is
why we should make it very clear from the beginning that we
expect a proper report at the end, nicely integrated in the
Wiki, so that others can learn and maybe continue the project
in the future.

In fact, I think that people should make notes on the Wiki
as they go along. I have doubts that we'll get a full report
at the very end otherwise.

Forming a SOC review committee

[Kai Blin]

* Dimi Paun  [19/04/06, 11:20:26]:
> The end result is significant lower value for Wine. This is
> why we should make it very clear from the beginning that we
> expect a proper report at the end, nicely integrated in the
> Wiki, so that others can learn and maybe continue the project
> in the future.

I agree, and I offer to put a post-mortem report of my 2005 project into
the wiki as a reference. I'm doing a seminar work on that topic, so I
still have all the notes. So if we agree on how the report should
(roughly) look like, I'll put one up.

Cheers,
Kai