Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
*+1*
Greetings from Stuttgart,
Alexander
On 23.11.2012 13:02, Frank Zunderer wrote:
Hi Marco,
in my opinion OXID could be much more "community driven" without code
contributions if there was more communication. OXID devs very rarely
comment conceptual suggestions in this list and also in the
bugtracker. Before developing or submitting new code, the concepts
behind the new code would have to be discussed, which is not
happening. This leads to the impression that there is no way to
contribute to development process except posting bugs where documented
features do not work the way they are documented, or Uservoice where
new features can be suggested. Both places are not suitable for
suggesting conceptual changes to the code, so you can only wait until
next release to see what the devs have cooked in their private kitchen.
Regards Frank
*Von:*dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] *Im Auftrag von
*Marco Steinhaeuser
*Gesendet:* Freitag, 23. November 2012 12:09
*An:* dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
*Betreff:* Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi guys,
@Dave: thanks for your thoughts. This is close to the way we are
thinking presently. But: no decisions made yet nor any time frame!
Actually, the development and CI structures have been build up before
we went open source. In this time nobody expected any contributions :-)
The re-structure is just a technical issue as well as a question of
time and resources: the code base has to be split, the CI process
("grown historically") has to be re-factored etc...
@Alex:
> this will never ever happen
Never say "never".
> but to me this looks like a prevention mechanism so nobody can
recreate enterprise features
Wrong.
> Oxid will end up like osCommerce did.
You could have found a better example ;)
@Marc: You're wrong.
Regards and have a nice weekend
Marco
*From:*dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org]
on behalf of Development @ ORCA Services AG [developm...@orca.ch]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 22, 2012 2:24 PM
*To:* dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
*Cc:* Dino Fellmann - ORCA Services AG
*Subject:* Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi Dave
Thanks for your thoughts.
To put it simple:
In my opinion OXID eSales, or better said the management of them,
never really understood the concept of a real community
driven/developed, open source software.
What they see is a product to market, a property to protect, just like
a usual piece of proprietary software.
They talk about the OXID eco system, not the community, there we have it.
And thus we will never ever see something just remotely resembling to
what you described if not something in management's head changes...
It's kind of depressing but that's the way I, and probably not just
me, see it.
Greetings from Switzerland
Marc Würth
*ORCA Services AG*
Bahnhofstrasse 11
CH-4133 Pratteln
Office Basel: Aeschengraben 10, CH-4051 Basel
marc.wue...@orca.ch
T. +41 61 205 80 80
T. +41 61 205 80 73 (direkt)
F. +41 61 205 80 81
www.orca.ch , www.orca-services.ch
*"We convert your visitors into customers."*
*Von:*dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] *Im Auftrag von *Dave
Holloway
*Gesendet:* Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 10:19
*An:* dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
*Betreff:* [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi all,
I was having a bit of a surf yesterday and found this comment from Erik:
http://phpterror.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/oxid-esales-show-me-your-94-unit-test-coverage/#comment-16
The original post was about unpublished Unit-Tests, which wasn't
terribly interesting, but it was the comment that caught my eye. It
describes the internal code deployment system of OXID and why it's
tricky to accept code contributions.
It's now clear to me why the switch to a distributed version platform
such as GIT/GITHub/BitBucket is so difficult: OXID has one codebase,
and the deployment scripts remove certain parts for the different
distributions (i.e the SOAP-Code gets removed for PE, and the
WYSIWYG-Editor gets removed for CE etc.). This means it isn't
practical or even possible for OXID to share their code, and why we
only have access to the neutered pseudo SVN repository at
http://svn.oxid-esales.com, where almost all authors are called
"nightlybuild".
The whole structure got me thinking: why does this problem exist?, and
I'm pretty sure
Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community [T-EK59Y2G4LW-57]
you are so right Frank
I agree in all points :)
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Martina Schimbach
http://www.facebook.com/www.bastelundhobbykiste.de
Martinas Bastel- & Hobbykiste
Geschäftsleitung
Bestellhotline: 0800-9655324
Martinas Bastel- & Hobbykiste
Inh. Martina Schimbach
Zum Grund 9
35796 Blessenbach
Germany
USt-IdNr.: DE 187589656
Tel: 0049 (0) 6474 - 882816
Fax: 0049 (0) 6474 - 8525
Internet: http://www.bastelundhobbykiste.de/ (http://www.bastelundhobbykiste.de)
oder http://www.kreative-buecher.de/ (http://www.kreative-buecher.de)
e-Mail: i...@bastelundhobbykiste.de
-Ursprüngliche Daten-
Datum: 23.11.2012 13:02:31
Von: Frank Zunderer
An:
Betreff: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Vorgang: T-EK59Y2G4LW-57
> Hi Marco,
>
> in my opinion OXID could be much more bdquocommunity drivenldquo without code
> contributions if there was more communication. OXID devs very rarely comment
> conceptual suggestions in this list and also in the bugtracker. Before
> developing or submitting new code, the concepts behind the new code would
> have to be discussed, which is not happening. This leads to the impression
> that there is no way to contribute to development process except posting bugs
> where documented features do not work the way they are documented, or
> Uservoice where new features can be suggested. Both places are not suitable
> for suggesting conceptual changes to the code, so you can only wait until
> next release to see what the devs have cooked in their private kitchen.
>
> Regards Frank
>
> Von: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
> [mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] Im Auftrag von Marco
> Steinhaeuser
> Gesendet: Freitag, 23. November 2012 12:09
> An: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
> Betreff: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
>
> Hi guys,
>
> @Dave: thanks for your thoughts. This is close to the way we are thinking
> presently. But: no decisions made yet nor any time frame!
>
> Actually, the development and CI structures have been build up before we went
> open source. In this time nobody expected any contributions :-)
>
> The re-structure is just a technical issue as well as a question of time and
> resources: the code base has to be split, the CI process ("grown
> historically") has to be re-factored etc...
>
> @Alex:
> > this will never ever happen
> Never say "never".
>
> > but to me this looks like a prevention mechanism so nobody can recreate
> > enterprise features
> Wrong.
>
> > Oxid will end up like osCommerce did.
> You could have found a better example ;)
>
> @Marc: You're wrong.
>
> Regards and have a nice weekend
> Marco
>
> From: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
> [dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] on behalf of Development @ ORCA
> Services AG [developm...@orca.ch]
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 2:24 PM
> To: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
> Cc: Dino Fellmann - ORCA Services AG
> Subject: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
>
> Hi Dave
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
>
> To put it simple:
>
> In my opinion OXID eSales, or better said the management of them, never
> really understood the concept of a real community driven/developed, open
> source software.
>
> What they see is a product to market, a property to protect, just like a
> usual piece of proprietary software.
>
> They talk about the OXID eco system, not the community, there we have it.
>
> And thus we will never ever see something just remotely resembling to what
> you described if not something in managementrsquos head changeshellip
>
> Itrsquos kind of depressing but thatrsquos the way I, and probably not just
> me, see it.
>
> Greetings from Switzerland
>
> Marc Würth
>
> ORCA Services AG
> Bahnhofstrasse 11
> CH-4133 Pratteln
> Office Basel: Aeschengraben 10, CH-4051 Basel
>
> marc.wue...@orca.ch
> T. +41 61 205 80 80
>
> T. +41 61 205 80 73 (direkt)
>
> F. +41 61 205 80 81
>
> www.orca.ch , www.orca-services.ch
>
> "We convert your visitors into customers."
>
> Von: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org [
> mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org ] Im Auftrag von Dave Holloway
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 10:19
> An: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
> Betreff: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
>
> Hi all,
>
> I was having a bit of a surf yesterday and found this comment from Erik:
>
> http://phpterror.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/oxid-esales-show-me-your-94-unit-test-coverage/#comment-16
>
> The original post was about unpublished Unit-Tests, which wasn't terribly
> interesting, but it was the comment that caught my eye. It describes the
> internal code deployment system of OXID and why it's tricky to accept code
> contributions.
>
> It's now clear to me why the switch to a distributed version platform such as
> GIT/GITHub/BitBucket is so difficult: OXID has one codebase, and the
> deployment scripts remove certain pa
Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi Marco,
in my opinion OXID could be much more community driven without code
contributions if there was more communication. OXID devs very rarely comment
conceptual suggestions in this list and also in the bugtracker. Before
developing or submitting new code, the concepts behind the new code would
have to be discussed, which is not happening. This leads to the impression
that there is no way to contribute to development process except posting
bugs where documented features do not work the way they are documented, or
Uservoice where new features can be suggested. Both places are not suitable
for suggesting conceptual changes to the code, so you can only wait until
next release to see what the devs have cooked in their private kitchen.
Regards Frank
Von: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] Im Auftrag von Marco
Steinhaeuser
Gesendet: Freitag, 23. November 2012 12:09
An: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
Betreff: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi guys,
@Dave: thanks for your thoughts. This is close to the way we are thinking
presently. But: no decisions made yet nor any time frame!
Actually, the development and CI structures have been build up before we
went open source. In this time nobody expected any contributions :-)
The re-structure is just a technical issue as well as a question of time and
resources: the code base has to be split, the CI process ("grown
historically") has to be re-factored etc...
@Alex:
> this will never ever happen
Never say "never".
> but to me this looks like a prevention mechanism so nobody can recreate
enterprise features
Wrong.
> Oxid will end up like osCommerce did.
You could have found a better example ;)
@Marc: You're wrong.
Regards and have a nice weekend
Marco
_
From:
dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] on behalf of Development @ ORCA
Services AG [developm...@orca.ch]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 2:24 PM
To:
dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
Cc: Dino Fellmann - ORCA Services AG
Subject: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi Dave
Thanks for your thoughts.
To put it simple:
In my opinion OXID eSales, or better said the management of them, never
really understood the concept of a real community driven/developed, open
source software.
What they see is a product to market, a property to protect, just like a
usual piece of proprietary software.
They talk about the OXID eco system, not the community, there we have it.
And thus we will never ever see something just remotely resembling to what
you described if not something in managements head changes
Its kind of depressing but thats the way I, and probably not just me, see
it.
Greetings from Switzerland
Marc Würth
ORCA Services AG
Bahnhofstrasse 11
CH-4133 Pratteln
Office Basel: Aeschengraben 10, CH-4051 Basel
marc.wue...@orca.ch
T. +41 61 205 80 80
T. +41 61 205 80 73 (direkt)
F. +41 61 205 80 81
www.orca.ch,
www.orca-services.ch
"We convert your visitors into customers."
_
Von: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] Im Auftrag von Dave
Holloway
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 10:19
An:
dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
Betreff: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi all,
I was having a bit of a surf yesterday and found this comment from Erik:
http://phpterror.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/oxid-esales-show-me-your-94-unit-t
est-coverage/#comment-16
The original post was about unpublished Unit-Tests, which wasn't terribly
interesting, but it was the comment that caught my eye. It describes the
internal code deployment system of OXID and why it's tricky to accept code
contributions.
It's now clear to me why the switch to a distributed version platform such
as GIT/GITHub/BitBucket is so difficult: OXID has one codebase, and the
deployment scripts remove certain parts for the different distributions (i.e
the SOAP-Code gets removed for PE, and the WYSIWYG-Editor gets removed for
CE etc.). This means it isn't practical or even possible for OXID to share
their code, and why we only have access to the neutered pseudo SVN
repository at http://svn.oxid-esales.com, where almost all authors are
called "nightlybuild".
The whole structure got me thinking: why does this problem exist?, and I'm
pretty sure that it all boils down to the marketing of the editions
(CE/PE/EE). Each edition is advertised as a separate product, each with
(basically) a separate license. Since most of the codebase of the 3 editions
are the same, people who want to contribute need to jump through hoops and
sign NDAs/similar documents
Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi guys,
@Dave: thanks for your thoughts. This is close to the way we are thinking
presently. But: no decisions made yet nor any time frame!
Actually, the development and CI structures have been build up before we went
open source. In this time nobody expected any contributions :-)
The re-structure is just a technical issue as well as a question of time and
resources: the code base has to be split, the CI process ("grown historically")
has to be re-factored etc...
@Alex:
> this will never ever happen
Never say "never".
> but to me this looks like a prevention mechanism so nobody can recreate
> enterprise features
Wrong.
> Oxid will end up like osCommerce did.
You could have found a better example ;)
@Marc: You're wrong.
Regards and have a nice weekend
Marco
From: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] on behalf of Development @ ORCA
Services AG [developm...@orca.ch]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 2:24 PM
To: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
Cc: Dino Fellmann - ORCA Services AG
Subject: Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi Dave
Thanks for your thoughts.
To put it simple:
In my opinion OXID eSales, or better said the management of them, never really
understood the concept of a real community driven/developed, open source
software.
What they see is a product to market, a property to protect, just like a usual
piece of proprietary software.
They talk about the OXID eco system, not the community, there we have it.
And thus we will never ever see something just remotely resembling to what you
described if not something in management’s head changes…
It’s kind of depressing but that’s the way I, and probably not just me, see it.
Greetings from Switzerland
Marc Würth
ORCA Services AG
Bahnhofstrasse 11
CH-4133 Pratteln
Office Basel: Aeschengraben 10, CH-4051 Basel
marc.wue...@orca.ch
T. +41 61 205 80 80
T. +41 61 205 80 73 (direkt)
F. +41 61 205 80 81
www.orca.ch,
www.orca-services.ch
"We convert your visitors into customers."
Von: dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
[mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org] Im Auftrag von Dave Holloway
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 22. November 2012 10:19
An: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
Betreff: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community
Hi all,
I was having a bit of a surf yesterday and found this comment from Erik:
http://phpterror.wordpress.com/2009/08/26/oxid-esales-show-me-your-94-unit-test-coverage/#comment-16
The original post was about unpublished Unit-Tests, which wasn't terribly
interesting, but it was the comment that caught my eye. It describes the
internal code deployment system of OXID and why it's tricky to accept code
contributions.
It's now clear to me why the switch to a distributed version platform such as
GIT/GITHub/BitBucket is so difficult: OXID has one codebase, and the deployment
scripts remove certain parts for the different distributions (i.e the SOAP-Code
gets removed for PE, and the WYSIWYG-Editor gets removed for CE etc.). This
means it isn't practical or even possible for OXID to share their code, and why
we only have access to the neutered pseudo SVN repository at
http://svn.oxid-esales.com, where almost all authors are called "nightlybuild".
The whole structure got me thinking: why does this problem exist?, and I'm
pretty sure that it all boils down to the marketing of the editions (CE/PE/EE).
Each edition is advertised as a separate product, each with (basically) a
separate license. Since most of the codebase of the 3 editions are the same,
people who want to contribute need to jump through hoops and sign NDAs/similar
documents to agree that the code belongs to OXID and that they have the right
to distribute it in all three editions without the requirement of making PE/EE
open-source.
So my question: why not do it differently? The name "community edition" is (in
my opinion) misleading and seems to have earned the reputation of "take this,
go away, and stop complaining about it Dave". Why not do something completely
different and take CE, rename it to "OXID eSales Basic", keep the license as
GNU and continue to sell your commercial/encrypted PE/EE features under a
different license as 'addon packs', such as "Professional Addon Pack" and
"Enterprise Addon Pack"?
This way, you can keep the "basic" core open-source and even put it on GitHub,
where you will be able to obtain free code contributions/patches from many many
developers, and it will still allow you to sell your advanced features and not
lose money. The community developers wouldn't have to sign any silly NDAs
either. The PE/EE Addon packs could still be versioned internally and wouldn't
have to be open-source.
So, kurz zusammengefasst, my suggestion would be:
- Replace the CE-Edition as "OXID
