[Plone-conference] Openspace: growing plone

Ramon Navarro Bosch ramon.nb at gmail.com
Wed Oct 22 15:34:46 UTC 2014


I'm sure going to be there, the latest changes on plone 5 are not
incompatible with the idea to use plone as a out of the box/TTW or use
plone as a framework or use plone as a platform to provide complex cms.

I'm agree to create a small group of people to think about the "vision" and
share to avoid repeating the Plone 2020 meeting again an again.

I'm completly agree that the Plone 2020 / Plone Roadmap / .... needs to be
reborn and that a massive amount of opinions must be recollected, but most
of it we need to encourage who is going to be involved on developing future
plone, and that means to take care also about new/old people to believe on
Plone, involve companies (like the intranet effort). Any idea like, lets
change zope to pyramid, lets simplify layers, lets clean, lets create a
webdav/file sync, lets create an api, ... needs to have people developing
it. If people starts to move to pyramid because their jobs involves using
that technology, if people stops commiting, there is no roadmap an idea
that may be enought strong, so at the end plone is what developers needs to
be with a small guideance(roadmap) on top of it.

Lets do the openspace, growing plone: growing the community (ex Plone
2020/Roadmap)

2014-10-21 20:00 GMT+02:00 Chris Calloway <cbc at unc.edu>:

> On 10/21/2014 9:51 AM, Timo Stollenwerk wrote:
>
>> Is anybody from the first roadmap team still around and willing to lead
>> the effort?
>>
>
> For the record (cf, http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-roadmap/Week-
> of-Mon-20121231/000093.html) that functioned Nov. 2011 through Dec. 2012,
> the first board-appointed roadmap team was:
>
> Martin Aspeli
> Geir Bækholt
> Mark Corum
> David Glick
> Matt Hamilton
> Calvin Hendryx-Parker
> Laurence Rowe
> Hanno Schlichting
> Jon Stahl
>
> In Dec 2012, a failed reboot was attempted and members polled for
> willingness. Geir, Mark, and Laurance opted out. Martin, Matt, Calvin, and
> Jon opted in. Massimo Azzolini offered to join. David and Hanno did not
> respond. Leaving:
>
> Martin
> Calvin
> Matt
> Massimo
> Jon
>
> I think Jon was the driver in the first round. One thing that came out of
> the first round is that a next round should be community based rather than
> appointed (cf, http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-roadmap/Week-
> of-Mon-20121210/000077.html).
>
> Timo, can you name the community members from last year's conference
> discussion?
>
> Looking at that last roadmap, it sure was feature driven. Not that it did
> not have some exposition on context that served as a stand-in for "vision."
> And not that having a feature driven component isn't a good thing. It
> simply seemed to derive from a sentence in the Guiding Principles section
> of the document which reads, "Incremental improvement is (sic) better than
> wholesale revolution." As a result, I could not see what would be very
> revolutionary about picking Plone. I  mostly was going to get just a set of
> incremental improvement that were either keeping up with what other CMSes
> were already doing or papering over longstanding Plone warts. This led to
> questioning the value of the document and the reboot failure (cf.,
> http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-roadmap/Week-
> of-Mon-20121231/000094.html).
>
> I think a statement of where we're going would be invaluable. It should
> guide what PLIPs get submitted and approved rather than being the sum of
> the PLIPs submitted or approved.
>
> At the same time, I don't want to see a roadmap that makes us captive to
> very narrow visions. I don't agree with statements like, "Out of the box
> the product is not providing much value in comparison to a rapidly
> progressing market," and don't wish to be boxed in by statements of what
> Plone isn't, shouldn't be, won't be, or cant be. There's nothing that comes
> close to Plone out of the box. It is still the fastest path to a
> functioning CMS that isn't already pre-installed by vendors.
>
> (And yeah, the pre-installation ubiuity issue has been flogged to death.
> And yet I don't see it as a positive outcome in the old roadmap. Nor having
> your Plone reboot with your server for that matter. The community obviously
> recognizes the value of pre-installation after some of that discussion a
> Vagrant kit is now on the download page. Maybe these are thing that are
> valuable to Plone as a product and not so valuable to contributing
> consultants.)
>
> I gravitate more toward visionary statements that reinforce what made
> Plone great like, "If that could be solved in some way,
> programmers/integrators/tinkerers could use this system again for
> whatever purpose they like: being it a large enterprise site, a small
> high-end experimental webapp, a backend webservice." It wasn't that Plone
> was the "only" CMS in the beginning and created a drive for 100% of market.
> It was that Plone was the only CMS you could bend to your will with some
> ease.
>
> It seemed to go off the rails with a parade of contributing consultants
> proscribing either increasingly onerous but politically correct ways of
> doing that one tiny little thing that was so effortless in other CMSes, or
> things that we weren't going to do to reach that degree of effortlessness
> because it wasn't in the contributing consultants' interest to make the
> politically correct Plone less obtuse. So I'd like to see a vision that
> subverts that tendency and thinks in terms of Plone as a great product that
> people want rather than depending on the "trust and loyalty" of
> increasingly obscure micro-niches.
>
> The latter as marketing is setting ourselves up for failure. People who
> write checks have no trust or loyalty. I saw this over and over again and
> it was how Plone had its lunch eaten by lesser CMSes. It was all what have
> you done for me lately. As the saying goes, "If you have to explain it,
> you've already lost the argument." Plone out of the box needs no
> explanation. It just works and works well. All that's left is the
> commitment to make it more amazing as a product that sells itself and then
> market segments, and even explaining your marketing strategy to your
> trusted and loyal customers, matter less and less. Otherwise the future is
> similar to being an increasingly smaller community of highly paid Cobol
> maintenance consultants. Not what I signed up for.
>
> --
> Sincerely,
>
> Chris Calloway, Applications Analyst
> UNC Renaissance Computing Institute
> 100 Europa Drive, Suite 540, Chapel Hill, NC 27517
> (919) 599-3530
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-conference mailing list
> Plone-conference at lists.plone.org
> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-conference
>



-- 
Ramon a.k.a bloodbare
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-conference/attachments/20141022/5c728ac2/attachment.html>


More information about the Plone-conference mailing list