[Plone-conference] Openspace: growing plone

Fulvio Casali fulviocasali at gmail.com
Wed Oct 22 17:37:59 UTC 2014

> Timo, can you name the community members from last year's conference

Here are some panoramic shots from that discussion (people don't sit still
long enough ;-)



On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Ramon Navarro Bosch <ramon.nb at gmail.com>

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Plone-conference mailing list
> Plone-conference at lists.plone.org
> http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-conference
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plone.org/pipermail/plone-conference/attachments/20141022/ea0ca3ea/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Plone-conference mailing list