@jblossom given the scarse resources, I too think that having a proper
short/long term plan is essential, in order to try to direct efforts where
they're the most needed. We can't force anyone to work on any particular
issue, but we can certainly get better at showcasing the places where
they're needed.
Personally, I'm not good at guessing the long-term future. 15 years ago I
didn't think servers would store most of our documents and apps, and here
we are now with the "cloud" everywhere! So I prefer to leave that to other
people with a bit more vision, even if I can sometimes contribute to that
kind of discussions.

@pipires, @michael:

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Paulo Pires <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 30, 2013, at 4:26 PM, Michael MacFadden <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > 1) A vision and marketing to attract people.  It's hard to attract
>  coders
> > if they don't know what they are coding.
>
> Forget node.js or any other "world-changer-wannabe" frameworks. As Michael
> states, most developers don't understand (or are even scared of) this
> project architecture/structure. Fixing this would be a great start!
>

+1

I tried to contribute to Wiab, a pretty simple UI modification, and I found
myself lost in the code a few hours, nagging poor yuri with questions,
before I could do anything simple (being new to modern web development,
gwt, etc was of no help either).


> > 2) We need a road map.
>
> I'd start with reorganizing code and simplifying the learning-curve for
> developers. Without developers, there's no product!
>

Would this be a good place to consolidate a roadmap?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WAVE#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aroadmap-panel
Even if the discussion takes place mostly elsewhere (in this mailing list,
for example), the results could be consolidated as tasks (with sub-tasks
and what not), and then grouped with names such as "v1.0",
"public_release_marketing", etc.
Or is that tracker reserved for coding issues, and we should look into
using the wiki instead?

Thing is that Michael prepared a discussion because of simple but very
> important things like renaming packages and module structure and there was
> little to no feedback from the community. This was more than enough for (at
> least) me to think there was no common interest in what me and Michael were
> doing and therefore I stopped.
>
I'm not familiar enough with your work, so I cannot comment on that and on
many other issues. However, if you deemed it appropriate and even started
work, I'd say, go ahead whenever you feel like it. I'm sure there's many
lurkers here in the same situation as me, thinking that it's great that
people work on what they feel necessary, even if we don't voice ourselves
every time :-)


-- 
Saludos,
     Bruno González

_______________________________________________
Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com
http://www.stenyak.com

Reply via email to