Consolidated Delegate Proposal

[Johannes Ernst]

Keeping track of requirements does not imply a waterfall model to  
development, in my experience. It does imply being conscious of not  
adding requirements towards the end of the intended process unless  
absolutely necessary. It is that second item that I'm advocating.

As the traffic on the list shows in recent days, it appears not all  
of us agree on slowing / freezing the list of requirements -- which  
is why we keep seeing proposals to add to the spec.

On Oct 17, 2006, at 23:32, Dick Hardt wrote:

>
> On 17-Oct-06, at 2:10 PM, Johannes Ernst wrote:
>
>>>> I think we need to come up with a decision making strategy that  
>>>> we can live
>>>> with, and get the decision made.
>>
>> What about first, declaring a requirements freeze. I think one of  
>> the reasons that discussions go around in circles is because new  
>> requirements and use cases are being thrown at the specs, and  
>> naturally, the specs do not meet new requirements without further  
>> change.
>
> Would be easy if we had done use cases, then a requirements step,  
> then write a spec. But there was not support for that. People just  
> wanted to start drafting a spec and did not want any process. So we  
> are where we are unfortunately.
>
> -- Dick

Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: lid.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 973 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openid.net/pipermail/openid-specs/attachments/20061018/f9e01f6b/attachment-0002.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
  http://netmesh.info/jernst