Working Group

Performance and Scale

Working Group Health

Its dead Jim.

Questions/Issues for the TSC

Group wil continue discussions on where we think our energies should be focused.

Overall Activity in the Past Quarter

Not a lot pending decisions from TSC

Planned Work Products

None, that would be illegal

Participant Diversity

All male this past quarter. Few regular attendees

Additional Information

So long, thanks for all the fish...

Reviewed By

  • No labels


  1. Mark Wagner : Are we decommissioning this WG as implied by the WG Health? Or are we trying to revive the WG as implied by Questions/Issues for the TSC.

    1. Hoping to keep it going under the new guidelines

  2. I've only been to a couple of PSWG meetings, so some of what I'm saying is speculation (Mark or others, please feel free to smack me down if I'm incorrect here).  My impression was that this working group had a lot of participation when it had teeth:  the Caliper project was required by the TSC to follow the recommendations of the PSWG's initial document on performance metrics.  Once this was finished, participation lagged gradually over time.  Am I correct in this summary?  I hope we can use the experience of this WG in our WG/task force revamp.

    Thanks Mark!

    1. Hart Montgomery Pretty much correct. Once the paper was released people left. Some changed jobs, some graduated and had to get real jobs. It also took us a while to figure out "whats next" . We tended to have good attendance when we had guest speakers like the "Fast Fabric" folks, etc.

      Trying to work the tradeoff between what we think is needed and what can attract people to help.

  3. I think it's tough to run a group like this given we really do not have a common architecture ... perhaps there might be some ties to projects like Ursa and Aries (and maybe Transact) as they are striving to be more of common components.