Hi Luciano +1 for the change of PhorArk path. Even if we take this as a typical Photo Gallery application, PhotArk still has almost all major back end functionality as a incubation project. What we are lacking is an eye catching front end (when compare it with flicker or picasa) .
But I think Avdhesh's idea is identical to the $subject. We can move forward with the intention of providing a better android photo gallery app. On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Suhothayan Sriskandarajah < suhotha...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 18 January 2012 10:37, Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Suhothayan Sriskandarajah > > <suhotha...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 The second approach seems interesting. > > > > > > But at the same time I also need to mention why there were very lack of > > > involvement in last mouths. > > > I think having a good understanding on the past failures will help us > > with > > > a better start. > > > > > > I think the main issue was having both the Rest Branch and Trunk, and > > > people working on both. > > > Though the REST was introduced to replace the trunk it still didn't > come > > up > > > to that level, > > > and further there was very little support from the senior developers in > > > designing how things should be going forward. > > > > > > > The PhotArk trunk has become a "legacy application"... and if you have > > worked with legacy applications you know what I mean. Hard to > > maintain, tightly coupled, etc... The REST branch was nothing more > > then a initiative to bring the same functionality that is in trunk, in > > a more flexible way, considering different software layers, etc... > > There was never a barrier to anyone that tried to collaborate on this > > effort, even some GSoC students started, others completed, their work > > in the REST branch. If any community member have better strategy on > > how we can make the trunk code more flexible, and easy to maintain, > > please speak up and let's discuss the different approaches. > > > > I totally agree on your point. Yes trunk has become a legacy application, > the main issue I was mentioning is that we tried to maintain both > the REST and the Trunk. That why all went out of control and messy. > > > > > I appreciate this new change but also request the key developers who > know > > > the domain to take some active part at the early stage of the project, > > > to bring the project to a some what a working level before letting the > > > project to finds its own way. > > > > > > > > > There is no mandatory requirement for us to go into this direction, > > what we have is a absolute requirement to be an active community... if > > we can become active without changing directions, fine... if we feel > > that changing directions will make us attract more contributors and be > > a more healthier community, and if everybody agrees on the issue, > > good... if we still the way we are, PhotArk will soon be a retired > > podling. > > > > I too feel this change is necessary at this point and > in current path PhotArk will be a dead project soon. > > My suggestion is to take this change and discontinue the development of the > previous implementation. > Can't we wrap up the existing back end with a suitable API and address it via android layer. And then we can keep enhancing the back end on demand. WDYT ? > I think this will help to keep the project focus on a unified direction, > attracting more developers and resulting in a better product.? > > Regards > Suho > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Luciano Resende > > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > > http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ > > > Thanks -- Subash Chaturanga Department of Computer Science & Engineering University of Moratuwa Sri Lanka Blog - http://subashsdm.blogspot.com/ Twitter - http://twitter.com/subash89
