PostNuke

Footnote: 1

Footnote: 1

Over the course of the past week, many requests, suggestions and even demands were made of what people think they want from the project, so I figured I would just make this easy, and ask, point-blank, "What do you want?

Many people insist on demanding 0.8, yet what exactly *is* 0.8? Do you just want some release numbered 0.8? That's easy to do, though I doubt that would appease them; What specific features, capabilities, enhancements and so fort do you want to see; what is important for your implementation of PostNuke?

Let's hear first what everyone wants, and then take it from there.

In essence, right after John passed the reigns of the project to me, and just before the mass Exodus that followed, I saw the project very much as in a similar vein as the Apache or Linux development trees.

There is a stable tree, and there is a development tree. In our cases, the stable tree was the 0.72x branch, while the development branch was the more cutting edge 0.8x development. As many of you that had been struggling with the 'stable' 0.72x branch knew, its stability left much to be desired, as most of the development concentrated on 0.8, leaving, IMO, 0.72x falling a bit by the wayside.

I strongly believe, as I have explained in one of my earliest articles, that 0.,8 development can and should continue, yet that 0.72 development should receive a renewed emphasis - in effect making the two separate development projects under the same umbrella.

That way, one development team can concentrate on making the 0.72x branch as stable and reliable as possible, while the 0.8 team would work on the 'future'. Since it would be necessary for the two teams to share knowledge and resources, the best of either branch would benefit the other as well.

Just because the former development team has opted to abandon the project, I do not believe that this vision needs to change - it just means that 0.72 and 0.8 will be developed and finished by new developers, and fresh blood has certainly never hurt a gene pool

Some of you may ask, why 'waste' time on 0.72, when 0.8 is 'around the corner'? Well, I've said it before, and I will say it again - regardless of much of the hype, and release promises, a functional (production capable) 0.8 was not even close, at best, 6 months out. While you can certainly download 0.8 from CVS, and play around with it, PostNuke is *not* just what the CVS contains, but it is also the ability to expand via the use of third-party modules, creative themes, etc... Since 0.8 would have deliberately broken compatibility with legacy themes and legacy modules, one would also have had to count the time it would have taken developers to port their modules, themes, etc.. over. Repeatedly having to fix and rewrite modules for each new release certainly grew taxing on developers, and the deliberate breaking of compatibility in the 0.72 tree because of the case issues certainly did not help either.

In summary, in order to give 0.8 needed time to mature, and develop, a rock-solid, stable release branch was needed that users and admins can utilize *right now* - I see 0.72x as that branch.

Seeing as how 0.8 is currently on hiatus, and waiting for a fresh flock of developers, I decided that the community is best served by us concentrating on making 0.72 as good as it can be.

What does that mean:

- Concentrating on, and little by little, eliminating and fixing all residual bugs and inconveniences left.

- Enhancing and expanding existing systems.

- Introducing short URLs (something PN desperately needs), yet while maintaining backwards compatibility so as to not break existing internal and external links.

- A theme system overhaul, to introduce either theme creation, and breaking the three column paradigm (which, incidentally, Neo has already done what was termed impossible within the existing PN Theme structure). More on that later and separately.

- Maintaining longer compatibiity for module developers, and introducing a path to the new API that is easier.

- Legacy support for themes, yet introduction of new technologies.

- Agressive alliances with existing web-technologies to enhance and improve performance and features.

- Innovation, innovation, innovation....

Some of these will start to be introduced with the 0.721 release, and others will follow in subsequent releases. Each release is intended to stress ONE new feature, and further streamlining of existing structures.

Therefore, in summary, the goal and objective is to provide you, the PostNuke administrator and user with a system and infrastructure that will allow you to get the best out of your site, while at the same time allowing you to extend and retain your investment in your site - don't have the time to update your theme, use the old one, until you do, etc...

I'm sure I have missed some issues, and might have misunderstood others - let me know, discuss this, and we'll revisit this issue. As I said, your well-being and your sites and applications are my concern, and it is with that in mind, that I have made these decisions - and in closing, I'd like to leave you with another Robert Frost quote:

"The best way out is always through."

There's quite a few issues that have surfaced on the mailing lists, as well as the article comments boards, so in the interest of organization, and general sanity, I will be spreading the various issues out to individual articles.

That way, we can keep the various issues segregated, and don't end up with a hodge-podge of uncontrolled commentaries.

The way I see it, there are a number of issues that are important to you, and I hope to be able to address them all in a satisfactory manner. But before I do, I feel I need to address one major issue, and that is one of expectations and differing needs.

Now, I'm also well-aware that it is nearly impossible to make everyone happy, and that some of you might not agree with directions and ideas I'm about to share.

That's okay. People disagree - if we didn't, we'd be robots. All I ask is that if you disagree, you rationally and calmly explain your disagreement, and the reason behind the disagreement. I don't pretend to know it all, nor do I assume I know what each of you need and want.

Now, that being said, this project is not here to satisfy the needs of everyone - as stated above, that's impossible.

The nature of Open Source is to 'scratch an itch', so all of us involved in the project do so because it meets a need of ours. Where Open Source becomes fun is when others look at a project, and suggest "How about...", and if your suggestion or contribution happens to fit our roadmap, and the direction we're going, or is even something we never thought of ourselves, so much the better. The project grows, everyone gets something they need, and we sing 'Kumbaya'.

On the other hand, if we see PostNuke as a weblog/CMS, yet you want it to be an espresso machine, then you need to realize that we are not a good match for you, and find something like PostSpresso.com or NukeXpresso.com to pursue your goals. No harm, no foul, and we still end up singing Kumbaya.

That being said, I do consider it important for those of us managing this project to take the needs of the community and its contributors into consideration, which is why I try to make these articles a regular feature to solicit and digest feedback from all of you.

The last batch of articles resulted in a lot of really valuable feedback, and many suggestions and ideas that have influenced our decisions regarding 'what to do next' . While I certainly have a definite vision and idea where to take PostNuke, and how to get there, as stated earlier, I don't pretend to know everything, and different folks contribute ideas and suggestions from a different angle, an angle that we may not have considered - again, that's what Open Source is all about. We show you ours, and you show us yours....

Now, onwards to the issues....

Footnote: 1

BTW - 5 Dollar Hosting provides the required software to run postnuke, and setup was fairly easy. Looks like it will be a good low-bandwidth solution.

Footnote: 1

Footnote: 1

Two weeks ago, when I advertised Freewriters.ca here, I had no idea of the internal power struggle that was taking place. I hadn't talked to John in a long while, and the excitement of installing and running the first PN site on my own was incredible. The article that I posted simply thanked eddie for all the work he had done on improving the system.

Two days later, as the visits were rolling in and I was delighting in sweet hyatus, I visited this site and received the shock. I think we would all agree that seeing one of the lead developers leave is not a sign of stability for any community. I immediately began to worry about the future of PN. After reading the articles posted here, and the somewhat lean transmission of duties to the new crowd, I relaxed a bit. The problem that persisted however, mostly magnified by my own lack of information was what exact route was Postnuke going to take? I realized the struggle was drawn over the future of PN, but I missed the part where these changes and the debate itself were clearly laid out for the community.

For instance, after surfing the wealth of information that exists on PostNuke, I couldn't find anything developed that eased the creation of themes for PN. I saw encompass as user-unfriendly, and most importantly as an appendage of PN, rather than an integral part of it. That is why I never installed it on my own site, relying instead on the free themes spewed out by Themecentral by the dozen. That, in my opinion, is unnacceptable for a comunity of developers the size of PN. Imagine my greater surprise when I saw the download link on this site's main page.

Another thing that touched me as unfortunate was the debate itself, and the mudslinging that I felt was going on behind the scenes. My question is whether the community had any say in this transfer of authority, and more importantly if it has anything to say in regards to the future of Postnuke. The new beta site is interesting, but it doesn't offer much change in my opinion. Rather it stands as a valid but unnecessary alternative to what already exists. The .4 seems to be on the hold, and that I view as a mistake, seeing how that would have been the only uniting call for the entire community.

I guess the jist of all that I've said above simply revolves around my own lack of knowledge and security in terms of what PN has to offer. From a simply 'graphical' perspective, without any knowledge of PHP, the changes that are taking place are largely cosmetic, with little or no interest to me. My only worry is of the .4 and where that will lead, but since it is largely on hold -to my knowledge, after having read Harry's first posts, I am not sure exactly where this entire community is going to. Certainly not continuing its natural course of in-depth change and stability. My ultimate question swirves around the future, therefore, and I would like to pose it to harry as much an anyone else who is interested in answering me: What was the actual debate, and how much say does the community have executive wise?

Thank you,

Mihnea Dumitru
mihnea@freewriters.ca
http://www.freewriters.ca

Footnote: 1

Why compile such a list?
Currently, some language files may be found via
a) notices on postnuke.com's language area, b) the results
of a "language" search on that site c) the PN site on
sourceforge 3) searching the PN download page and 4) searches on the Internet.

I think there should be one comprehensive collection,
so that people don't have to go through the searching
above (unless they really, really want to).

* As there are quite a few packages out there
please send the following information so that
we may properly make them available centrally.
I'd like to make this list as COMPREHENSIVE,
PRECISE, and USEFUL as possible. I appreciate your cooperation and input, in advance.

* I also know that some of the packages that have been released have ...issues. This is an excellent opportunity
to re-release a package that you have already released, perhaps based on your post-release fixes? My humble suggestion.

1) URL(s) where the package may be downloaded.
2) precise name of package file(s) - please note
all file names such as .zip and tgz versions, etc.
3) pn version for which the packs are intended
(please use precise version numbers such as 714,
etc., and avoid pn71x, etc. When the package can
be used by more than one pn version, please indicate
precisely which versions they would be, e.g., "both 713
and 714," etc.

4) Date of release.
5) Person(s) making the release.
6) Contact info.
7) Any special characteristics (additional translation of some add-on modules are included, some portion of pn
is not translated, etc.)

* If the case where some of the above information is
noted at the download site or within the package, etc., please copy/paste that information and include in your
response to this call for contributions. This will help to
make the compilation trouble-free and precise.


* Please send your contributions for the list to:

*** laszlo@issho.org ***

The deadline for contributions is September 1.

Please DO NOT send questions asking about the
language packages' availability. When it is ready,
the data will be provided in the appropriate location.

Thank you.

Tony Laszlo, Tokyo
http://www.issho.org/laszlo.html