Re: [Swarm-Support] development priorities (was Re: Membership in Swarm Developmen Group)

[glen e. p. ropella]

Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
> The PS3 is an interesting value.  You can just use the PS3 as a 9
> processor Linux machine.  Check it out:
> 
> http://www.terrasoftsolutions.com

So what?  There are many gadgets that have interesting value.  But, that
doesn't mean the SDG should spend the little energy it has on porting to
them.

>> Well, my (unsubstantiated) claim is that people don't use the scheduler
>> because they can't understand what they're creating.
>
> This list provided many examples and explanations of how to do it and
> what it means.  Given this, I conclude users don't do it because it
> isn't very useful for their purposes.  They aren't sufficiently
> motivated by the value.

[grin]  Your conclusion is a worse assumption than my assumption because
1) Swarm is difficult to use, 2) Swarm is technologically and
behaviorally perverse, and 3) development is dominated by 1 person.
There are very many obstacles to effective use of the scheduler.  The
fact that there are some over simplified examples available doesn't make
Swarm more usable.

You're correct, however, that they aren't motivated by the return on
their investment because the investment is very high.  And we don't know
what their return might be because they can't invest enough to use it!

In any case, my point wasn't to talk about vague stuff like this.  My
point was that there are some requirements for Swarm that it fails to
meet.  And adding new features to the current software is a waste of
money.  Hence, a better use of the SDG's resources is to either build a
good reference implementation (not the current albatross) that meets the
requirements set forth for Swarm _or_ abandon the idea of supporting a
reference implementation altogether.

-- 
glen e. p. ropella, 971-219-3846, http://tempusdictum.com
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first
appears he is a protector. -- Plato