[TYPO3-typo3org] Consolidate - don't divide?

[Alex Heizer]

Hi,

Is someone considering using another CMS for the .com and .org sites? 
That would be stupid. :)

But to answer your question, CHC forum doesn't have the breadth or depth 
of features that Jive does, and Jive's been used in implementations with 
tens of thousands of users and millions of posts. If it's something that 
must run in TYPO3, then how do we motivate contributions to CHC forum so 
that it has the features needed to support the community? The same with 
the wiki, and why not also Mailman?

Sometimes using a competitor's product for a period of time can give 
valuable real-world experiences which we can use to see how we can 
improve what we create. Just like Microsoft using UNIX for their Hotmail 
servers, they were able to see what worked and what needed to be 
improved to bring their Windows servers up to an acceptable level of 
performance and reliability (at least that's what they say, anyway).

Alex



Dmitry Dulepov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Alex Heizer wrote:
>   
>> It's well-known that for a time Microsoft ran a set of UNIX mail servers 
>> until they came up with a robust-enough Windows solution to meet their 
>> needs.
>>     
>
> Yes and Hotmail used Unix _for_some_time_ but was finally migrated to 
> Windows.
>
>   
>> So, yes, it happens. That's exactly my point. Use what works 
>> until the functionality is there. And a wiki, mailing list or forum are 
>> not "cms".
>>     
>
> No doubt :)
>
>   
>> Again, my point. A CMS *could* have version control, bug tracking, etc., 
>> so why not use TYPO3 for that?
>>     
>
> Because typo3 does not have these two. It has wiki but we use mediawiki 
> because there were no timtaw at that moment. However we use timtab and 
> not wordpress at buzz.typo3.org because we have timtab.
>
>  > Currently for the tools which are being
>   
>> used that are not in TYPO3, there exists no comparable equivalent in 
>> TYPO3.
>>     
>
> I belive there is CHC forum. I never used it, may be it is not good enough.
>
> I have nothing against 3-rd party bug trackers, version control, etc. 
> However I am against 3rd party *cms* on any typo3 site. Again: I am only 
> and only and only and ... against another cms. That's all. I am not 
> against KB software (because we have no such in typo3) or bug tracker 
> (because we do not have it either).
>
>   
>> If your feet are too slow, you choose a bicycle while you take up 
>> jogging so that you can improve your speed. If TIMTAW doesn't meet the 
>> needs of the community, improve it but continue to use what *can* 
>> provide what you need until that time.
>>     
>
> You know, it is much easier to improve product when it is used. 
> Otherwise why improve it at all? It is simple: if people use something, 
> they tend to improve it. If they are happy with anther software, why 
> they may want to improve something else? Most likely they even will have 
> no idea that something should be improved. Things to improve always come 
> from real life usage.
>
>   
>> In other words, which is more preferable?
>> 1. Providing *no* solution while we wait for "someone" to code it?
>> or
>> 2. Providing a solution during the interim so that at least we have 
>> something while we wait for it to be available in TYPO3?
>>     
>
> 2 of course. But this again is totally different thing that I am talking 
> about :)
>
> To stress: can we use Joomla on typo3.org if Joomla provides something 
> that we need but do not have in typo3? Yes or no? :)
>
>