[OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we want from an Order-managed addonlisting?
Daren Firminger
daren at digcat.com
Mon Aug 29 13:59:39 BST 2016
Tuesday 1730 good for us too. cheers
On 29/08/2016 10:42, Tahir Malik wrote:
> Tuesday 1730 is fine.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Mark Goodnight
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 23, 2016 5:20PM
> *To:* Axel Faust
> *Cc:* Ootb-hive
> *Subject:* Re: [OOTB-hive] [ADDONS] What do we want from an
> Order-managed addonlisting?
> Count me in for option A
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark Goodnight, PMP, ERMp
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Aug 23, 2016, at 09:18, Axel Faust <axel.faust.g at googlemail.com
> <mailto:axel.faust.g at googlemail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all the feedback. Considering that Jeff is in a timezone
>> that is consistently running behind, and Francesco (likely others
>> too) wants to minimize impact during work hours, we should aim for a
>> time slot similar to or later than TTL / Office Hours.
>>
>> I am proposing Tuesday the 30th at 1530 UTC, which would be 1730 for
>> all / most contintental Europeans and 1030 for our resident Texan. If
>> there aren't too many vetoes until tomorrow, I'll set up a hangout.
>> (Counting respondents for option A we are currently one below the
>> limit of 10 for a hangout, and I really don't expect a sudden uptick.)
>>
>> On 23 August 2016 at 11:24, Jean-Christophe KERMAGORET
>> <jckermagoret at bluexml.com <mailto:jckermagoret at bluexml.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> I can do either or both options but I would prefer a).
>>
>> When could it be?
>>
>> Tuesday or Wednesday next week for example? What are the most
>> usable hours with time lag?
>>
>> Jc
>>
>> Envoyé de mon iPhone
>>
>> Le 17 août 2016 à 13:58, Axel Faust <axel.faust.g at googlemail.com
>> <mailto:axel.faust.g at googlemail.com>> a écrit :
>>
>>> 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
>>> <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
>
> _______________________________________________
> OOTB-hive mailing list
> OOTB-hive at xtreamlab.net
> 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
> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-hive
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.xtreamlab.net/pipermail/ootb-hive/attachments/20160829/107c8769/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the OOTB-hive
mailing list