[TYPO3-core] Proposal for the upcoming Roadmap and LTS

[Philipp Gampe]

Hi Alexander,

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 
are:
* issue tracker
* newsgroup
* 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 
(big) project.
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 
with forge.

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 
client.
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 
concentrated atmosphere.

> 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 
simple:
* 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.

Best regards
-- 
Philipp Gampe – PGP-Key 0AD96065 – TYPO3 UG Bonn/Köln
Documentation – linkvalidator
TYPO3 .... inspiring people to share!