[TYPO3-dam] Does DAM die?

[Andreas Wolf]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello Jonas,

> René didn't writhe any post in the list since nearly 5 months, and in
> the last weeks there was nearly no movement. For me it's realy important
> to know how DAM will continue?
well, there is some movement, though it is really "hidden" and not
well-known... In July there was a discussion in this list, just look for
"Any new news?" by Andreas Balzer and alle posts which followed it
(Andreas' one has message-id
<mailman.1.1183997683.14547.typo3-project-dam at lists.netfielders.de>).
There is an initiative to sponsor the further development of DAM and
also integrate more developers, but I don't see a progress there.
Perhaps something really great is on the way, but we just don't notice it?

> There are still a lot of bugs to fix in rc1 and there is still a lot to
> do for dam. TYPO3 needs something like a DAM, that's for shure, but it
> has to be stable, it has to support the basic typo3 features like
> workspaces and history.
>
> I think a fileadmin with search function, versioning and that the files
> are not copied when you insert them into a content element, are the
> basic functions we realy need, everything else is nice to have.
Well, as Rene called it, the DAM is a "beast" of about 35,000 lines of
code. It's not that easy for new developers to get into this, and also
many people hesitate to do something about DAM without Rene, at least
that is my impression. Though I appreciate Renes past work, I also think
a clear decision where DAM will go is neccessary. Other CMS also evolve
and become better at the field of media management, and so TYPO3 must
clearly improve there, otherwise it will be outruled in this issue which
is becoming more and more important. Also a missing or poor asset
management is one of the show-stoppers for larger installations - a CMS
really needs a good media-management to be an option for enterprise
usage. Just think of stock-images you have bought, but with limited
rights, e.g. only usable for a few months because you have a special
campaign which needs them. So you may set a date at which these images
will become invalid and will be removed from the page, along with a note
to the author of all pages using them that the image has been disabled.
How should this be possible without DAM?

> And the most important point is, that it should integrate as transparent
> as possible in the whole system. There should be a way to use dam
> without adding dam fields for every file/image field, and changing the
> fe source code the way that it uses DAM. Otherwise, DAM users will
> always have a much smaler amount of extensions they can use. And there
> is already a split up between 'just dam' and 'no dam support'
> extensions, which is also not realy good, because this way the
> development is done again and again and again.
Yes, I agree here, and I hope that DAM in the mid future is stable
enough to be integrated into the core, so it is activated by default.
This would mean the end of all hacks and workarounds we have to use by now.
I only recently read about a user-function somebody has written to
easily integrate the DAM with extensions, but I couldn't find the
message right now.

Perhaps there will be any news about DAM at the T3CON?

Cheers,

Andreas

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG7wNcHWtXp155bP8RAid1AJ47WwydY+g1XW2j8anIZWIBLTW3zQCfe3Wn
pf/v6v046T2+7kl2R+RmFP4=
=Gt/n
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----