[TYPO3-dam] Any new news?

[Michiel Roos [netcreators]]

Daniel Hinderink wrote:
> Hi Michiel,
> 
> I appreciate your own work to improve the DAM.
> 
> That being said, I believe you do not acknowledge the current situation 
> we as DAM users are in.

DAM users includes me. I am voicing my own opinion as an objective newcomer.

> Appeals like the one you are writing below will have no effect.
> René _can't_ do as you ask him, if _we_ don't put him in a position 
> where he can! That means time (paid for) and additional manpower (paid 
> for) in his vicinity. That is the heart of Ekki's suggestion.

Rene cant apply the submitted patches to svn on typo3xdev because:
- he doesn't have time?
- he doesn't make time?
- he cannot delegate tasks?
- all of the above?

> Let's take quick look at the theoretical alternatives:
> 
> A fork is no option from my pov, as i have pointed out before. When the 
> system is more openly developed, more people can join in and eventually 
> may be someone can take over the lead. We are nowhere near that situation.

Ries v. Twisk:
"I remember that Kasper once said: a patch a day keeps a fork away...."

But . . . agreed, forks suck badly! I don't want to see the dam being 
forked at all.

> So we can either watch it die, or do something _together_ to improve the 
> situation.

I'm all for option B.

> Ekki's suggestion is an attempt to bring more accountability and 
> stability into the development communication of the DAM. That includes 
> SVN and answering to bug fixes.

Please replace the 'includes' with 'includes first and foremost'.

> This comes at a price, which is rather moderate if we can find enough 
> companies to join in. I am prepared to pay this price, because the DAM 
> is worth it to me and I believe this is also a model solution for some 
> problems in the TYPO3 project. I sincerely hope many of you are willing 
> and able to do this too.

There are more than enough dev's willing to contribute. Sponsoring a 
project if fine with me. But the initiative is not in my hands. It's in 
the hands of the current maintainders. So if you need sponsors . . . 
please start writing companies and clients and convince them to start 
sponsoring.

> If you feel this is too risky, then suggest criteria that make it less 
> risky. If you think it is the wrong set of objectives, the suggest other 
> ones. If you have some other form of factual criticism, then suggest a 
> solution. Then we are moving in the right direction.

Please, please, I am up for any kind of model/solution as long as it 
spearheads 'active maintenance and trackable development'. Posting a 
reply to a bug on the bug tracker takes as much time as applying a diff 
(which you can see is ok) to the trunk in svn.

I don't see what the time (having or making time, there's a difference 
there)problem is for fixing small bugs.

I unerstand that time is needed for 'developing' the dam further and 
taking 'big' steps etc., but the small steps should be taken always.

I am sure that companies/clients are willing to sponsor a good 
development 'plan' with clear milestones etc.

> I really hope we can find a consensus resulting in common action and 
> support here.

I am convinced all of us are with you on that one.

Kindest of regards,


Michiel Roos

-- 
Netcreators BV :: creation and innovation
www.netcreators.com

Interesse in werken bij Netcreators?
http://www.netcreators.com/bedrijf/vacatures/