RE: [Phpgroupware-developers] Communication ... again (was PHPDoc s for head)

[Mailings - Christian Boettger]

Hi,

> From: Dave Hall [mailto:address@hidden 
> Subject: Re: [Phpgroupware-developers] Communication ... again (was PHPDoc
s for head)

> On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 10:31 -0400, Alan Langford wrote:


> >  I'll freely admit that I too have considered just going in and making 
> > changes and creating "my" branch. This is partially because I might be 
> > duplicating effort (there is little way to tell) and partially knowing 
> > that the odds of having those changes embraced are slim, since they 
> > might step on some undocumented plan discussed in IRC, or they might 
> > violate some unwritten philosophical principle.

> I for one (and I think there are others) who would be 
> interested in hearing your ideas and plans.

ACK. 

> phpGW has grown as a grassroots FOSS project.  I would love 
> it for someone with deep pockets to step in and offer to 
> sponsor the project, but for that to happen there would need 
> to be some very serious negotiations.  Side note: I have done 
> some math on it :)

Apart from the math... If we don't find a sponsor in the sense the one
Ubuntu found, any "normal" sponsor will like to have a say in development
plans etc. So I guess there will be discussion about a hostile take-over etc

> Major work is required in most areas, it is actually 
> depressing to look at the code base and list everything.  

ACK

> Some of it is fundamental design flaws, which can't be fixed 
> quickly.  

So true, sadly.

> Some "competing" projects have hoped that some eye candy will distract
people from the flaws.

Well, the prblem is: it actually works. People seem to expect software to be
exactly like that when they have use M$ "long enough". :-(
eGW and OpenGroupware are rather widespread, at least over here in Germany.
And mainly because they actually look nice and look like they can be used
easily. (Note: this NOT a statement about the code quality of either of
these projects, AFAIK OpenGroupware has a rock solid code base in addition
to the looks!)  

Developers like writing good, interesting code with heaps of features and
functionalities. Users don't want to know about that, they just want to do
some, mostly very few, things. Decision makers should have a good look at
both sides of the coin, but tend more and more to only look at the GUI
look&feel.

So: the basic idea to add some "eye candy" is NOT bad. It's actually very
necessary. We may dislike this, but who cares?

> Lack of resources, 4 part time coders doesn't make a viable 
> project when the code base is this large.  I think we need a 
> minimum of 4 coders working full time on the project, with an 
> agreed development plan.

We don't have them at the moment. Anyone willing to pay for that amount of
work (and for exactly these tasks) (whether by putting in own resources or
by paying the current developers) will want to influence the development
plans etc. So we are back to the "hostile takeover" thing.

No easy solution here.

> Lack of agreement.  There are too many people who want to run their own
race.

As in any "community project"? Or: too few people really putting an effort
in working *together* and not just side-by-side or against each other.

Whatever. It a voluntary effort. People are welcome for want they are
willing to contribute. In this situation it's no good in critizing the
contributors for what they are not willing or able to contribute; otherwise
they just leave and the total number of contributions is lower than before.

> For me Kai has shitted me from day 1, and I have tried to get 
> over it, but it just isn't possible.  Sorry for the noise but 
> it is just the way it is.

Argghhhhhh. STOP IT. Noone expects you to like him. None expects Kai to like
you. Please, just try to work together. 

> I think it has the potential to be this, but this is almost 
> the middle of 2005.  We need to make some pretty radical 
> changes if we are to stay relevant.

Basic change: get more developer power. All else can be looked after
afterwards.

> Now I have a young son so my family and my bank balance are 
> more important to me.

Very understandable. As stated above: this is a voluntary effort. I think:
noone has to justify himself. Everyone has his own reasons for constributing
just the amount he does. Contributions are welcome. Pressing for more than
is given voluntarily is counterproductive as it will just demotivate people.

BTW: the thing with the bank balance has to be taken into account over here
(probusiness) as well. From the beginning aand for every step.

> phpGW can be great again, but it will take more than a few 
> emails, it will take months of solid work.  It will take 
> heated discussions.  It will take a real commitment from 
> everyone, not just the handful of active coders.

Could you elaborate a bit more on who else apart from coders have to show
commiment, how it could be showns and in which way it would help?

Are you thinking about people writing handbooks and docs, maintaining the
wiki and website and such? Yes, those people would be very welcome.

Regards

Christian aka bofh42
Release and Quality Coordinator