[Discuss] open hardware documentation survey
blueback09 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 26 14:20:11 UTC 2013
I suspect that once we figure out what we need it will be easy to discover
several pre-existing software tools that either already do exactly that, or
can easily be forked to do exactly that.
The problem is that we don't know what we need.
That's where the committee comes in. We need to get some stakeholders into
a room and hash out a mutually agreeable prioritization of requirements.
There is little point in discussing specific "hows" until we have some
consensus on "what."
For example, the STEP file format is indeed a standard for exchanging
product information, but it's copyrighted and has a massive amount of
overhead. I doubt even OSE is doing any project big enough to justify that
much complexity. A giant, complicated format like STEP could obviously
describe simple projects, but it would also create a huge barrier to entry
due to all of the complexity that is only there for complex projects. Since
most open hardware projects are simple, or at least striving for
simplicity, STEP might be kind of like hiring a marching band to follow you
around and play a song when you get a new text message.
Or maybe the complexity is worthwhile, or doesn't matter, and my personal
impression of the situation is inaccurate. The best way to find out is to
compare it to a bunch of other people's impressions so we can come up with
a generally applicable solution, not just a solution to my specific problem.
At any rate, the discussion has to happen before any implementation makes
On Tuesday, March 26, 2013 7:41:19 AM UTC-6, Bryan Bishop wrote:
> > In order for a repository project to be successfull, a group of people -
> > with equal rights
> > to decide what to do, should be organized. Only this way, users can be
> I think it would be better to show a prototype that works. Not a
> commercial product, but just a small package manager that actually
> manages packages. Maybe something based on opkg. If you want something
> made by committee, just stick with ISO 10303 (which, for whatever
> reason, nobody seems to know about... wtf).
> - Bryan
> 1 512 203 0507
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss