Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community

2012-11-23 Thread Marco Steinhaeuser
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.chmailto: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.chhttp://www.orca.ch, 
www.orca-services.chhttp://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 eSales Basic
- Sell the PE

Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community

2012-11-23 Thread Frank Zunderer
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:  mailto:dev-general-boun...@lists.oxidforge.org
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:  mailto:dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
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

 

 mailto:marc.wue...@orca.ch marc.wue...@orca.ch
T. +41 61 205 80 80

T. +41 61 205 80 73 (direkt)

F. +41 61 205 80 81


 http://www.orca.ch www.orca.ch,  http://www.orca-services.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:  mailto:dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
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 to agree

Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community [T-EK59Y2G4LW-57]

2012-11-23 Thread Bastel- Hobbykiste, Inh. Martina Schimbach
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 frank.zunde...@zunderer.de
An: dev-general@lists.oxidforge.org
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 parts for the different distributions (i.e 
 the SOAP-Code gets removed

Re: [oxid-dev-general] OXID Deployment System + The Community

2012-11-22 Thread Alexander Kludt


  
  
Hi there,

this will never ever happen - oxid's enterprise features are mostly
coupled deeply into the core. I don't know why this is done,
but to me this looks like a prevention mechanism so nobody can
recreate enterprise features without hacking the core system or
jumping through hoops. But I like your idea, and I think this would
be the way to go - otherwise some day a fork will be made and
Oxid will end up like osCommerce did.
-- 
  
  
  
  mit freundlichen Gren
  Alexander Kludt
  
  
  __
  Phone: 09283-5925453
  Fax: 09283-592671
  Skype: kingschnulli
  Email: cod...@aggrosoft.de
  Website: www.aggrosoft.de
  
  __
  Aggrosoft it intelligence GbR
  Tannstrasse 12
  95111 Rehau
  GERMANY
  
  Sitz Rehau, Amtsgericht Hof
  Steuernummer: 223/165/54508
  Ust.-Id. Nr. gem  27 a Umsatzsteuergesetz: DE260722773
  
  ___
  Diese Nachricht ist nur fr den Empfnger () bestimmt, sollten
  Sie nicht der Empfnger sein lschen Sie diese Nachricht
  umgehend und geben Sie uns bitte per Email (cod...@aggrosoft.de)
  Bescheid
  ber den flschlichen Erhalt. 
  




  

  
  

  

Dave Holloway
  22. November 2012 10:19
  

  
  
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 eSales Basic"
- Sell the PE-Edition as "OXID eSales Basic + Professional Addon
Pack"
- Sell the EE-Edition as "OXID eSales Basic + Enterprise Addon
Pack"

...this would solve your licensing issues, would give you the
ability to harness the power of the OXID developer community.
And to be super-sure that you don't have to distribute your code
for PE and EE, you could deliver each product as two separate
ZIP files. e.g. (oxid-basic.zip and oxid-pe-addonpack.zip).
Internal