[TYPO3-core] Proposal for the upcoming Roadmap and LTS
philipp.gampe at typo3.org
Thu Nov 15 13:58:43 CET 2012
Alexander Hahn wrote:
> Can't agree with you on that. It should not be one or some people to
> decide where we collect those information. It should be discussed.
> Maybe in a new community team.
In the last 30 years, some best practices have been developed.
Those core practices that have not changed for larger projects since then
* issue tracker
* chat (IRC)
The only problem I have with forge is, that you do not find the search box
easily. Other than that, forge is an issue tracker like used by any other
You can call it "list of tasks", "todos", or whatever you like.
You can use a dedicated software for it (which has some advantages) or you
can collect the list on a wiki, inside a word document or anything else.
You will just not be able to change the fact that a project needs to have a
list of issues and that this list needs to be maintainable. That is archived
I have never found a (web) forum that works as good as newsgroups. They just
do not give the flexibility and most are even harder to use than a newsgroup
In contrast, even stackoverflow is harder to use then the newsgroup if you
want to stay informed of the heard beet (and the problems) of the community.
Another advantage of newsgroups is, that it requires a little bit of effort
to set it up, thus you keep the kids out, creating a more professional and
> And my idea was a place where everyone can contribute, where every new
> person sees it. All those examples you named are not like this. You
> have to search for them.
This would not be helpful at all.
We have standards! We will not reduces these standards to allow people to
contribute tons of stuff that has to be cleaned up by others. This is not
the way it is going to work.
The lowest way of contributing is to drop something at the newsgroup,
followed by attaching it to an issue.
Even if you attach a patch to an issue (which is a good thing), then still
someone has to pick it up, review it, maybe clean it up and push it to
gerrit. Once it is there, two others have to review and test it.
This work has to be done, no matter how simple you want to make the process.
After all, someone (if not the contributor) has to do the work. Always!
> And features are often not a problem of one team, you have to combine
> teams to get to the problem and find a solution.
This is a known problem with distributed teams. The solutions are know and
* communicate openly about each step you are going to make
* do small steps and publish each
* do real live meetings once a while
> In the moment - and please keep in mind: this is only my feeling - all
> tasks the current teams have on their todo lists are important and
> highly advanced in some cases but they don't follow a global strategy.
> They can't react on requirements of TYPO3 users, because many users
> don't have a voice. I know they should commit themselves, but they
> don't. Question is, does TYPO3 want features others don't have or stay
> where it is.
Trouble is, that feelings do not bring us anywhere (forgive me to formulate
it a big rude). TYPO3 is an open community project. You can not (simple CAN
NOT) expect anyone to do anything unless you pay him.
If devs do not care about bugfixing, then they do not. Either you go ahead
or you ask someone to do it for you (maybe in exchange for something, e.g.
non code work ... docs, helping hand, CSS, JS, book keeping, ...).
Please make concrete suggestions what to change. Be specific!
A simple "we need a place" does not help. It is good to discuss about it,
but it will not bring us anywhere unless someone comes up with an idea on
*how* to do it.
Once we have an idea, we can talk if it makes sence, if we can maintain it.
Philipp Gampe – PGP-Key 0AD96065 – TYPO3 UG Bonn/Köln
Documentation – linkvalidator
TYPO3 .... inspiring people to share!
More information about the TYPO3-team-core