It's not a problem that your developers started work on the new prototype, and I'm glad they are doing so in the open. Clearly they must be working to *some* kind of requirements, even if only informally specified within your team. My concern was that the requirements would not be published, or that your brief email that kicked off this thread was all we were going to get. So, thanks for clarifying that a longer write-up is in the works.
Neil On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 5:31 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > 2013/9/5 1:00 -0700, [email protected]: >> ... >> >> Indeed, once again we don't know what worked and what didn't work and >> why, and what Oracle is *really* after. Instead we are expected to be >> lulled by the disclaimer that "this is just another prototype [that you >> know nothing about]". > > Just to be clear, I don't expect anybody to be lulled. I'm working on a > longer writeup, which I hope to post soon, and I will welcome all (calm > and rational) comments and questions in response. > > (In retrospect perhaps we should've started work on the new prototype in > a private repository -- but then, no doubt, someone would later accuse > us of working behind closed doors in a different way. Sigh.) > > - Mark
