Re: [bika-dev] Worrying renames

[C. <ro...@up...>]

On Tue, 2006-09-26 at 10:02 +0200, bika - lemoene wrote:
> Roch=E9 Compaan wrote:
>=20
> >Maybe we need to put more structure into the release management. Let's
> >consider making time-based releases, maybe every 6 months, and plannin=
g
> >in more detail what goes into each release.=20
> >
> not possible - all our development at this stage is still sponsor=20
> driven. so neither spec nor date of releases can be determined up ahead

Many open source projects run without sponsors. Developers sponsor their
time. If we put up a conservative release schedule and developers can
take ownership of modules, time-based releases can become a reality. If
we only make releases if there are sponsors, this project will never
have a life of it's own. I say this because I know that there are
developers that have shown interest in the Bika project. So much so that
we have a opportunity to talk about it in the "Plone in Science" case
study at the Plone conference. In this sense more structure makes a lot
of sense.

Even if it is just an exercise to develop a roadmap for Bika that we can
communicate to other people I think it will be beneficial. By doing this
you sell the vision of Bika and send out a positive message.

> >Back to the renames. What was the reasoning behind renaming Jobcard to
> >Worksheet? They don't seem that different to me?
> > =20
> >
> They are not different except for the semantics. 'Job card' i encounter=
=20
> more often down at the garage when i have my car serviced than in the=20
> lab world now, was inherited from earliest designs when Bika was still=20
> called Bach. 'Work sheet' i learned since is in use by 90% of all the=20
> many labs i talked to and explicitly requested for upcoming development=
=20
> by a sponsor

I belief the change from Job card to the worksheet is for the better. I
only disagree with renaming invoice to statement.

--=20
Roch=E9 Compaan
Upfront Systems                 http://www.upfrontsystems.co.za