On 14 September 2011 16:02, Tom Davies <tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi :) > I think we do need at least 1 paid senior dev/team-leader to start working > on Base asap. I think other people would join without feeling so dismayed > or overwhelmed if they knew there was someone paid to support/mentor them. > > Allegedly there are a few organisations that 'support' LibreOffice and for > most of them it might be a huge advantage to get Base nearer to it's > potential. Base is a blocker to using RedHat or Ubuntu so they might be > willing to part-fund a post. The various independent back-end projects > might be willing to part-fund a post or their devs might be willing (perhaps > even keen) to work on Base. > > Some of that does seem to be a question of marketing. "How to attract devs > to Base". > Regards from > Tom :) > > > --- On Wed, 14/9/11, Alexander Thurgood <alex.thurg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Alexander Thurgood <alex.thurg...@gmail.com> > Subject: [libreoffice-marketing] Re: Recruitment for Base (Was Re: > [steering-discuss] Base - a new mailing list?) > To: marketing@global.libreoffice.org > Date: Wednesday, 14 September, 2011, 15:27 > > Le 14/09/11 15:05, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit : > > Hi Charles, > > > > The second point is about recruitment of developers. I hope that I'm not > > making myself a mistake in assuming that what is being understood is to > > actually hire developers... perhaps what is meant is attracting > > developers? In any case, we cannot mandate developers to work on > > something like we would do in a company. It's a big difference between a > > business and a FOSS community and project. Developers join by > > themselves, provided the information is there. > > Exactly, my comment as to the requirements of a developer were more in > line with "if a volunteer wants to step up this is how high the barrier > to entry is going to be", and not at all a view to hiring a developer, > which as you mention, is not something that really happens in FOSS > projects (or else, only on rare occasions). > > > > > > I must admit I am myself very, very unclear on what we are trying to > > achieve with Base. And it's not just now, it's always been the case (for > > me, at least). Base was added to Openoffice.org as a new module and the > > whole experience was suboptimal. > > Well my memory is obviously slightly older than yours because I remember > the days of OOo 1.1.x and prior to that with StarOffice, where databases > were already accessible, where forms could be designed and made, and > queries designed and run. I even designed a switchboard document with > buttons that let me link and switch to forms for data entry. The rest, > as they say, is history, and after some humming and hahing by Sun we > ended up with the Base module as we currently know/love/hate it. > > > > mean time. The result now is not that we have developers not doing > > anything on Base (in fact, we do). The result is that there are less > > resources on this because developers are simply less interested in > > acting on it, and there's nothing we can force them to do (or not do). > > Quite. > > > > > > Hence, one thing that might help -and this is very much a call for > > brainstorm, with the hope that we collect expectations about Base- is to > > gather feedback from users, see what we can understand from their use, > > or non-use of Base, and not being afraid to ask some real questions. > > I actually think this would be a good idea : it was, after all (at least > that is what we were led to believe), the results of a user survey that > goaded Sun into action about designing Base2 (as opposed to > maintaining/improving the then existing database capability). > > > > > As an example: should Base be scrapped off? Should we use it as a front > > end to another DB? should we try to compete with Access? Should it be > > geared towards a more complete usage (read: integrated as a front end to > > enterprise DB); is it enough to squash the reported bugs on Base? etc. > > > > After that survey we can a) analyze the results b) take action in two > > forms: suggestions to the broader community (devs included) or writing a > > set of RFEs (Request For Enhancement). RFEs are something developers can > > work with. You may call them hacks, but the point is this; you describe > > in technical and functional terms, step by step, what a feature should > > be. Not just "It should be able to compete with Access" or "it should be > > red". But rather: "description of feature, rationale, behaviour, usage > > scenario, etc.". > > > > If a survey were to see the light of day, it would need to have the > broadest possible communication, as the majority of Base users I know > are not actually on any of the LibO lists, or at least their voices are > not often to be heard. It would be interesting to hear what people still > using OOo feel too, because on the Apache lists, IBM, for one, appears > to have no real interest in a sophisticated frontend solution (they got > rid of it completely in Symphony). > > > So whilst the general discussion about Base could well be carried out on > the discuss list, it would be good for discussions about making a survey > to be kept here IMO. > > > Alex > One market where an access-like database is needed is schools. School's curriculum adapts slowly and while for business use it would be relatively easy to sell client server databases as much more useful, it will be much more difficult in a school. Unless of course the UI was made to be very straightforward and installing the database server was turn-key. I know that the PostgreSQL developers are interested in closer integration with OOo from direct talks with them and we will be looking at this in more detail and we have realistic chances of getting significant funding resources. All I think a survey will tell us is that there are some significant sectors that need a database and some that don't. I would have thought the resource expended on surveys could be put to more practical use either fixing bugs in existing code or raising finance for generating something new and better. -- Ian Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications (The Schools ITQ) www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940 The Learning Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
