A proposition for a true opened developement !

Sato-san brought the subject of the language files in another post, and it made me think about this.

I would like to see a lot more "integration" and "centralization" of code in the ImpressCMS project. I would like to see "more things" in "1 place" then everything spread around the internet.

In that regards, I would like to see the languages files as well as modules and themes all centralized in one location. Ideally SVN. But I know this would be a big change from the "XOOPS" way as it would require many people to have commit acces on SVN.

This might scare some people but not me. With SVN it is very easy to revert anything that needs to. So I do not see real problems with this...

And the more people we have on the SVN, the more quickly bugs will naturally be fixed.

So my suggestion would be to have new folders in our SVN :

- Languages
- Modules
- Themes

Then we provide everyone who requests it with commit access to our SVN so they can commit their modules, their language files, etc...

Maybe we need to think about the tree structure of our SVN, but the idea would be to have everything in one place, and give commit access to everyone who requests it.

A TRUE opened development. Everyone who wants to contribute will now be able to do so ! And if he does something very wrong, because we have many people using it, it will be reverted, fixed or improved quickly after.

Of course, we would have some mechanism to "eject" a user who is just playing dumb...

This would be a clear separation from the "XOOPS way", a clear statement of our true enforcement of our OPENED vision !

Now I know this will scare some of you, but let's discuss it

It's a great idea - but scarey!

But I would suggest one change:

Have a "Live" branch which is the one where any issues and so forth are correct... and the "development" branch which any can contribute to.

The "Live" would always be a few days behind the "development" in order for errors to be reported and acted on...

Like I said in another post: SVN has a learning curve and requires specialised tools. Making a translation only requires a text editor. If there is a simple way to add and check language files, then I'd be ok with it. otherwise, this project is turning into a developers only project again, which isn't truly open IMHO.

Herko

I agree that SVN as a learning curve but it is not that difficult.

But anyway, there is nothing that will stop anyone to get the latest language files, make correction and send it as a patch on SF so someone else understanding SVN can commit it.

Quote:

Language files, like themes and like module, are part of the code, so yes, it is related to developers but it does not need to be done by a developer...

I believe it makes sens that all code is centralised in the same place. But we need to put mechanism in place so that anyone can contribute without knowing code or SVN. Anyone can submit a patch to the tracker...

Great idea Marcan.

We should prepare set of "Subversion HOWTOs" videos / tutorials for different crowd. Anyone touching the code should go through this training.

I see another possible advantage of proposed centralization - "dynamic build process".

People can simply pick combination of followings and hit build.

* core
* core-hacks
* languages
* modules
* cloned modules
* themes
* editors

We can do this only if we have them at some central location i.e. our SVN.

Thanks,

Quote:
Awesome !

And I'm sure there are other great things we could do because of centralized code that we still ignore.

Are we entertaining the idea of a dev.impress gforge, svn type site, I mentioned something similar before and I know James brought up some possible complications, but would this not be an idea for people to work openly.

Or is this a bad idea?

Would be cool to link any gforge-like application to our svn /modules

what's the possibility of this happening?

Well - one of the main people resonsible for XForge is around here somewhere

Marcan:

I guess it's worth a try as an experiment.

Dave: That's the reason I suggested the "Live" & "Dev" versions (I'm sure there's a better naming structure - but lets use this for now )

Basically "Live" svn would be available to "Core" devs only - but the "Dev" release would be available to anyone.

There would be a small delay of - for example - 3 days ... after this delay, any code which seemed to be suitable from "Dev" could move to Live.

Perhaps a Branch on "Dev" being made for every month?

Does this make sense? Or am I talking nonsense

As far as I know, commit access for an SVN project repository at sourceforge.net is either on or off; it can't be directory-specific.

I think this a great idea. As davidl2 said there would be nice to have a div and a live version in the svn. Otherwise is true that this is only for developers. Maybe do this with some part of the code. For others files, like the language files, maybe we can use something like the the module in dev.xoops for uploading new translations for each module. This will allow people who just want to translate, do this in an easy way.

Just an idea....

Given my observations @ X over the past years, we would be making a mistake if we didn't move forward with an Open model. After all, that has been one of the biggest requests.

I like David's suggestions.

Yes, there is a potential for headaches, but I think it is doable.

I spoke a little more about this to Dave & Marcan via MSN ...

Basically they expressed a concern (expressed in different ways but essentially the same point ) about this adding too much confusion - and providing 2 sets of trackers to look at.

Marcan pointed out the "private club" issue that people have accused some of us as being before...

I'd like to modify my suggestion of having the "Community branch" as being on the main project forge.

This does cause one problem in that people would be able to directly submit code to the main branch.... but we can always move this, and revert back to the previous version if required?

Whichever way - I think Marcans suggestion for open development is excellent - and it would mean anyone... (even people we don't necesserily see eye to eye with )... can assist in making a damn good product.

I am very happy of this discussion. When I talked about this in the XOOPS world I was crucified every time .

I would like to propose an SVN structure for our project. Proposition can be found here :

ImpressCMS SVN Structure

I guess that the Open development would happen on either a branch or task then?

Yes.

Anyonw could create a branch in core/branches/ and develop soemthing there. Then, more "experienced" developer (which I don't like the term) would review the changes and merge them in the trunk.

It's the same thing as submitting patches on SF, but with a branch on SVN, it's easier to merge, and if we release a new version before including someone's work, then we could as this developer to merge his branch with the new release, so it's less work when merging to the trunk.

It's a community/team efforts and the work of everyone in the community (including us of course !) gets in the next release sooner !

Marcan: How do tasks differ from branches? And where would release snapshots be located?