[OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we want from an Order-managed addonlisting?
Daren Firminger
daren at digcat.com
Thu Aug 18 07:42:09 BST 2016
Hi Axel
Im interested to help, a) and b)
cheers
Daren
On 18/08/2016 07:39, Angel Borroy wrote:
> Available for a) and b)
>
> Angel Borroy
>
>
> El 18 de agosto de 2016 a las 8:34:38, Lanre Abiwon
> (el_gigantes at hotmail.co.uk <mailto:el_gigantes at hotmail.co.uk>) escribió:
>
>> I am in support of option (a) as I am unable to participate in
>> option (b).
>> Lanre Abiwon
>> _________________________________________
>> If you do things right, people won’t know that you’ve done anything
>> at all.
>>
>>> On 17 Aug 2016, at 13:57, Axel Faust <axel.faust.g at googlemail.com
>>> <mailto:axel.faust.g at googlemail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> After an initial stream of replies, this topic has fallen silent again.
>>> It has become clear that we won't come up with a plan via any form
>>> of async communication (regardless of mailing list or any "new"
>>> tool). I feel this needs some form of face-to-face communication /
>>> collaboration over a defined amount of time to work / argue this out
>>> and either come up with a common denominator plan or a redraw of
>>> what ADDONS can / wants to be.
>>>
>>> I would like to ask everyone:
>>>
>>> a) Would you be willing / available to do some kind of web session /
>>> web meeting in the next couple of weeks to discuss ADDON goals?
>>> b) Would you be willing to use the next Alfresco Global Virtual
>>> Hack-a-thon (23rd of September) to discuss / finalize ADDON goals
>>> and work on an initial sets of addons to be listed / reviewed /
>>> whatever we decide to come up with?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Axel
>>>
>>> On 25 July 2016 at 20:33, Axel Faust <axel.faust.g at googlemail.com
>>> <mailto:axel.faust.g at googlemail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> First of all: Sorry, I forgot to reply to the list in my
>>> response to Tahir. I still have to get used to using Google Mail
>>> more regularly now.. Thanks Tahir for including that in your
>>> counter-response.
>>>
>>> "So in my personal case if the plan doesn't change we still hold
>>> on to something we thought 2 years ago and didn't provide the
>>> result we wanted."
>>>
>>> This very thread is intended to come up with a plan (or THE
>>> plan) that we can work with, which may be very different from
>>> the old one from 2 years ago.
>>> And forgive me for saying, but "first provide result and then
>>> look on fine-tuning them" was essentially what I was trying to
>>> kickstart with my draft + reviews and see how well that turned
>>> out. So how do we go about that this doesn't happend again?
>>>
>>> If there are other people willing to start without a plan, do
>>> stuff and come back and refine it later, I would be very happy
>>> to see that succeed. Given previous experience, I have my doubts
>>> and would wait for it to bear the first fruits, before I risk
>>> spending my time...
>>>
>>> Kicking the entire ADDONS business to the curb and killing any
>>> intention to come up with an addon listing is a very real
>>> consideration already discussed on the board, and I personally
>>> don't have any intention as well to continue with something that
>>> just won't work. So I hope there are other people interested in
>>> this so this becomes a real discussion about plan / "what to
>>> do", and desn't remain a back-and-forth between Tahir and myself...
>>>
>>> On 25 July 2016 at 20:03, Tahir Malik <tahir.malik at contezza.nl
>>> <mailto:tahir.malik at contezza.nl>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think “getting our act together” is working at this
>>> moment. So probably our plans aren't suitable for us to work
>>> with, in this case I'm clearly referring to myself.
>>>
>>> So in my personal case if the plan doesn't change we still
>>> hold on to something we thought 2 years ago and didn't
>>> provide the result we wanted.
>>>
>>> For me personally this would mean 2 things:
>>>
>>> 1.Get everyone in our team accepting that we need to change
>>> the way we work and maybe first provide result and then look
>>> on fine-tuning them
>>>
>>> 2.Leave the Addons team and start a new one to still
>>> valuable contribute to the community
>>>
>>> I have no personal issues with anyone of you 😊, but this
>>> just doesn't seem to work for me and I'm being honest and
>>> hopefully it's respected.
>>>
>>>
>>> Tahir Malik
>>> Sent from Outlook Mail for Windows 10 phone
>>>
>>> *From:* Axel Faust <mailto:axel.faust.g at googlemail.com>
>>> *Sent:* 25 July 2016 17:26
>>> *To:* Tahir Malik <mailto:tahir.malik at contezza.nl>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we want from an
>>> Order-managed addonlisting?
>>>
>>> You may already be jumping ahead to the inclusion of addons
>>> in Honeycomb, which isn't necessarily the same as including
>>> them in an Order-managed listing (which would be just on our
>>> web page with potentially different kinds of badges
>>> differentiating "self-certified" from "reviewed").
>>>
>>> "First things first": Reach an agreement on what we actually
>>> want from addon listing and how we want to get there, to
>>> have a sustainable process before we exhaust / frustrate
>>> ourselves in uncoordinated actions.
>>>
>>> ADDONS never had a problem with suggesting addons for
>>> inclusion in either the issue tracker or the wiki page you
>>> linked. I had already merged the two together to form a
>>> backlog
>>> (https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Addon-review-schedule
>>> <https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Addon-review-schedule>)
>>> of addons to be reviewed. But unfortunately, there was never
>>> any real effort on reviewing these.
>>> Why would we need an "updated list of rules" when we never
>>> really had any formal rules except for a draft? (which by
>>> the way includes a provision for source code to be
>>> accessible, but leaves it open in what form)
>>>
>>> One result of the discussion in this thread could be the
>>> definition of pre-conditions for an addon to be considered
>>> for inclusion in a Honeycomb distribution. This would
>>> obviously involve DISTRO in terms of how we want to provide
>>> Honeycomb (tieing into the Honeycomb vision thread Jeff
>>> started). But I'd like for ADDONS to "get our act together"
>>> and finally come up with a review / listing process that all
>>> aggree on and actually do the potentially boring, but
>>> necessary work of processing all those addon suggestions...
>>>
>>> Jeff's suggestion was that "self-signed" would mean the
>>> addon author has reviewed her addon herself based on the
>>> criteria catalogue we define.
>>> At that point there would potentially be very little
>>> verification / review on our part (except the really simple
>>> stuff, like license / source access / release bundling) and
>>> it might be flagged in our listing as such ("developer
>>> assures she complies with best practices but YMMV"). This
>>> "self-signed" self-registration of an addon could also act
>>> as our input funnel for a more thorough review, before we
>>> put our "stamp of approval" on it. Such an addon could then
>>> be reviewed by DISTRO for inclusion (which could be a
>>> different level in our "stamp of approval" collection).
>>>
>>> On 25 July 2016 at 16:47, Tahir Malik
>>> <tahir.malik at contezza.nl <mailto:tahir.malik at contezza.nl>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Okay... still some things are unclear right now.
>>>
>>> First things first, we need an updated list of addons:
>>> - https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/issues/1
>>> <https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/issues/1> -->
>>> haven't been updated since october 2014
>>> -
>>> https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Candidates-of-our-favorite-free-open-source-add-ons
>>> <https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Candidates-of-our-favorite-free-open-source-add-ons>
>>> --> october 2015
>>> - Probably update the wiki of 2015 and merge those together
>>> - https://github.com/share-extras/
>>> <https://github.com/share-extras/> --> Include all of
>>> them updated since 2015?
>>> - What do we do with the Hackaton(s) list(s)? Are some
>>> of them ready to be included in the Honeycomb edition?
>>>
>>> We need an updated list of rules on how we include
>>> "self-signed" Addons.
>>> - Is having the code on github a must? I've seen
>>> multiple 'cool' addons which aren't on github, but are
>>> 'free' to use as-is
>>>
>>> Cause these aren't addon's we've tested I wouldn't
>>> suggest just supplying them with no way of disabling
>>> them if needed by a user.
>>> So DISTRO guys is there a way to disable certain addons
>>> on install?
>>> We should have a configurable list of enabled/disabled
>>> addon's on installation or creating a bundle/image.
>>>
>>> *From:* Douglas C. R. Paes
>>> *Sent:* Friday, July 22, 2016 3:20AM
>>> *To:* Jeff Potts, Tahir Malik
>>> *Cc:* Ootb-hive
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we want from
>>> an Order-managed addon listing?
>>>
>>> I liked the self certified add-on idea.
>>>
>>> Em qui, 21 de jul de 2016 13:30, Jeff Potts
>>> <jeffpotts01 at gmail.com <mailto:jeffpotts01 at gmail.com>>
>>> escreveu:
>>>
>>> One more thing...
>>>
>>> The process I described sets up a simple hierarchy
>>> of add-ons:
>>>
>>> Un-trusted or Self-published: Add-ons that are
>>> freely-available in the wild, on GitHub, on
>>> addons.alfresco.com <http://addons.alfresco.com/>, etc.
>>>
>>> Self-certified: Add-ons that the owner says meet all
>>> of the "must" items on the OOTB Add-ons Best
>>> Practices Checklist
>>>
>>> OOTB Approved: Add-ons that the Order of the Bee
>>> have agreed by voting that an Add-on does indeed
>>> meet all of the must items.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Jeff Potts
>>> <jeffpotts01 at gmail.com
>>> <mailto:jeffpotts01 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't think anyone is proposing that the order
>>> has to test or fix any add-on.
>>>
>>> What is being proposed is that we have some sort
>>> of process for vetting add-ons, and Axel is
>>> pointing out that simply having a list hasn't
>>> been enough. It requires volunteers to actually
>>> look at each add-on and evaluate it against the
>>> objective criteria Axel has compiled.
>>>
>>> I think what has been lacking are volunteers to
>>> do that work and a prioritized list of add-ons
>>> that need to be vetted.
>>>
>>> Perhaps people who own those add-ons should be
>>> the ones to make a first pass at the criteria.
>>> Have them self-evaluate. Then they can be the
>>> one to submit their add-on to the community with
>>> a "self-certification" that it meets the
>>> criteria. The group can then spot-check their
>>> favorite "must" items and vote +1/-1 on
>>> including the add-on. A down vote due to the
>>> failure to meet a "must" item must be addressed,
>>> then the submitter can request again.
>>>
>>> This hopefully reduces the burden on the addons
>>> committee and automatically narrows the list of
>>> add-ons to those who are motivated enough to do
>>> their own check against the list and hopefully
>>> make improvements in their code.
>>>
>>> If we do a good job communicating the value of
>>> being an OOTB-vetted add-on but an add-on owner
>>> still doesn't think it is worth the effort to be
>>> listed, that probably means they aren't invested
>>> enough in that project. And if that's the case,
>>> we don't really want their add-on on this list.
>>> And if it's a good add-on that has simply been
>>> abandoned, some other community member can fork
>>> it, self-certify it, and submit it.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:30 AM, Tahir Malik
>>> <tahir.malik at contezza.nl
>>> <mailto:tahir.malik at contezza.nl>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Axel,
>>>
>>> I want to propose a different setup for our
>>> Addons community.
>>> Instead of thoroughly testing other people's
>>> code and fixing it where needed we should
>>> add all the (functional) working Addons in
>>> the edition and fix the addons when they
>>> seem to have a problem.
>>> This could eather be in the github issues or
>>> we forward the issues to the rightfull
>>> addon's party and help them fix it.
>>>
>>> So what you'll get is that instead of having
>>> 3 addons, you'll have at least 15 addon's
>>> which will definitely have more value than
>>> what we currently have.
>>>
>>> And I think we should next to Addons also
>>> add Patches to the list. I've created
>>> multiple patches in the past (and still do)
>>> on community and we should just bluntly add
>>> them and take the responsibility to fix them
>>> if needed.
>>> If too much issues with them, discard them.
>>>
>>> So the goal is exactly the same, only the
>>> approach it different and you'll have more
>>> result in less time and hopefully will have
>>> a compellingly more valuable honeycomb
>>> edition than we now have at the moment :).
>>>
>>> To put this further we should have a pre-req
>>> list for these addons:
>>> - Should be running on at least one client
>>> production system
>>> - We should have at least tested the addon
>>> functionally
>>> - etc.
>>>
>>> The same for Pathes and we need to make sure
>>> that we can supply the Addons/Patches on
>>> different Alfresco Versions.
>>> So the puppet/docker config should keep a
>>> list for each Alfresco version.
>>>
>>> Next to this I want to in the future let our
>>> team create Addons, that could be 1 fully
>>> new addons we decide (let's say in the
>>> hackaton) or 2 pickup half working addons
>>> from the community and make it work.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Contezza
>>>
>>> *Tahir Shazad Malik*
>>>
>>> *email*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> tahir.malik at contezza.nl
>>> <mailto:tahir.malik at contezza.nl>
>>>
>>> *mobile*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +31 (0)6 14 77 50 82
>>>
>>> *office*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> +31 (0)848 68 89 02
>>>
>>> *website*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.contezza.nl <http://www.contezza.nl/>
>>>
>>> linkedIn <http://nl.linkedin.com/in/tsmalik/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Twitter <http://twitter.com/tahirshazad/>
>>>
>>> *From:* Axel Faust
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 21, 2016 12:48PM
>>> *To:* Ootb-hive
>>> *Cc:*
>>> *Subject:* [OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we
>>> want from an Order-managed addon listing?
>>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> as our previous ADDONS mailing list was
>>> closed due to inactivity, it is time to
>>> contemplate the state / future of the
>>> committees work.
>>>
>>>
>>> Initially, the committee was set up to
>>> compose, review and manage a list of
>>> Community addons / tools that we as the
>>> Order can recommend to users of Alfresco
>>> either because they fit a very specific
>>> niche of features, are qualitatively
>>> exception or simplify specific use cases
>>> immensely. In comming up with a process
>>> / guideline to review and accept addons
>>> in such a list we had some discussions
>>> about criteria but little concrete
>>> progress was made. At some point I
>>> started to compile a draft criteria
>>> catalogue
>>> (https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Inclusion-criteria-overview
>>> <https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Inclusion-criteria-overview>)
>>> to help me structure my ideas and be
>>> used as a concrete basis for additional
>>> debate. Response had been mixed, I
>>> created two addon reviews as showcases
>>> and asked others to try and use the
>>> catalogue for their own reviews to
>>> gather feedback as well as input for
>>> potential changes (both detail or
>>> general direction).
>>>
>>> Since then, nothing has really happened
>>> in the committee. For me it became clear
>>> that I could do little to encourage
>>> others to either try their hand at a
>>> review or come up with a concrete
>>> counter-proposal of how we want to go
>>> about compiling a list. Additionally, I
>>> was burdened with a higher load at work
>>> and didn't really find the time to
>>> continue doing reviews by myself, and
>>> neither wanted to since doing stuff
>>> unilaterally defeats the purpose of a
>>> committee / the Order. I am confident I
>>> can rectify my problem with the work
>>> load now that there'll be a couple
>>> changes in my work life. But engagement
>>> by other members is still crucial and
>>> initiative has yet to been demonstrated
>>> in this particular area.
>>>
>>> My question(s) to you now:
>>>
>>> * Do we still (want to) consider it an
>>> objective of the Order of the Bee,
>>> to compile a list of addons / tools
>>> that have been qualitatively
>>> evaluated (in some sort), and to
>>> have that list provide added value
>>> over what is already provided by
>>> addons.alfresco.com
>>> <http://addons.alfresco.com/> or any
>>> potential tool that may be
>>> introduced with the new community
>>> platform?
>>> * How do we want to go about compiling
>>> such a list?
>>> And here I don't mean minute details
>>> (GitHub issues vs. whatever task
>>> listing), but questions about
>>> "output artifacts" (what is part of
>>> the listing), "inclusion criteria",
>>> "distribution of effort",
>>> "committment to review schedule /
>>> targets"
>>> * Who wants to (regularily) take part
>>> in addons-related activities within
>>> the Order (and hasn't previously
>>> been aware of what you could do)?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Axel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> OOTB-hive mailing list
>>>
>>> OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
>>> <mailto:OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net>
>>>
>>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>>> <http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive>
>>>
>>> Follow Contezza on LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/contezza-informatiemanagement> or
>>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/contezzaim>!
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OOTB-hive mailing list
>>> OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
>>> <mailto:OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net>
>>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>>> <http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OOTB-hive mailing list OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
>>> <mailto:OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net>
>>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>>> <http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Douglas C. R. Paes
>>>
>>> Follow Contezza on LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/contezza-informatiemanagement> or
>>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/contezzaim>!
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OOTB-hive mailing list OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
>>> <mailto:OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net>
>>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>>> <http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive>
>>>
>>> Follow Contezza on LinkedIn
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/contezza-informatiemanagement> or
>>> Twitter <https://twitter.com/contezzaim>!
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ OOTB-hive mailing
>>> list OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net <mailto:OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net>
>>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>> _______________________________________________ OOTB-hive mailing
>> list OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
>> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
>
> _______________________________________________
> OOTB-hive mailing list
> OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.xtreamlab.net/pipermail/ootb-hive/attachments/20160818/e0bd32d9/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the OOTB-hive
mailing list