[hpsdr] HPSDR Projects

[Philip Covington]

On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Scott Cowling <scotty at tonks.com> wrote:
> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> Peer review can occur on several levels.
>
> It can be "concept" review, such as "I'm thinking about a project for this
> purpose, what does everyone think about the feasibility of it?"
>
> It can be a "feature" review, such as "does project implement an
> acceptable/desirable set of  functions?"
>
> It can be an "interest" review, such as "If one of these were available,
> would you want one?"
>
> It could be a "design" review, such as "I am going to build it this way, do
> you see any problems with or can you suggest improvements to the design?"
>
> The "design" review can occur on several levels, such as schematic, parts
> selection, PCB layout, software coding, etc.
>
> But you already know all this. :-)
>
> In the life of an HPSDR project, the progression seems to be from "concept"
>  to "feature" to "design", with "interest" being gauged along the way.
>
> The discussion seems to be over when the wiki page gets put up during the
> progression of the project. In the early stages of HPSDR (when we had many
> fewer members) there was more "concept" discussion before the wiki ever went
> live. Now that we have 800+ members, it is a bit more difficult to please
> everyone, especially in the initial stages when project goals and features
> are more fluid.  It gets easier for projects to get derailed and end up in
> oblivion.
>
> The two projects under discussion, LPU and Pennywhistle are interim
> solutions (to Demeter and Thor, respectively) for long standing projects
> that have stalled for one reason or another.
>
> I'll let Graham speak for Pennywhistle. On the LPU, the "concept" and
> "feature" reviews were simple (and where Demeter had the most difficulty).
> The "interest" was clearly there.  I deliberately took the time to get
> "design" input on the LPU because that was my interpretation of Steve's
> "peer review" requirements.
>
> (The LPU wiki was put up on Oct 27 and the announcement to the list was made
> on Oct 30.)
>
> So I guess I am with Dan: I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. :-)
>
> Some projects get more early discussion than others. Some potential project
> leaders want early input to determine interest and help determine features
> to implement before they launch a project.  Some other projects are so
> obviously needed that people would do them on their own anyway, so the wiki
> is a way to share open source projects with interested parties.
>
> I think that there is room for both kinds of approaches within the HPSDR
> community.
>
> 73,
> Scotty WA2DFI

One man's "fuss" is another man's legitimate concern.  My suggestion
is to give any proposed project a few days of opportunity for
discussion on the HPSDR list before accepting it on the HPSDR website
as an "official" project.  This is how previous projects were done and
we don't have to get the agreement of all 800+ members of the "HPSDR
community".   Having been here from day ONE when HPSDR was a ONE man
project, I guess I thought that my concerns would be considered more
than making a "fuss". :-)

Phil N8VB

 1228818428.0