Endless featuring

Kozuch
Profile Picture
Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Endless featuring

Posted:06 Apr 2007 (10:59 UTC)
Do we really need such simmilar packages like Stars and Recommends are? Why not to merge these two and do one package with more functionalities? Bitweaver is never going to be strong if further development goes this way.

The reason I chose Bitweaver was I thought it's plan is to pretty strictly overview the development process in the sence of not doubling package features.

I know this is a minor issue, but its more about a system I think.
Arnaud HERVE
Joined: 25 Oct 2004

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:07 Apr 2007 (21:15 UTC)
{quote format_guid="tikiwiki" comment_id="8297" user="Kozuch"}
The reason I chose Bitweaver was I thought it's plan is to pretty strictly overview the development process in the sence of not doubling package features.{/quote}

Same for me.

I also believe it is difficult to optimize present functions and monitoring new ones at the same time. I left Tikiwiki because it was becoming a monstrous explosion of new functions, almost one a month, and none of them was getting optimized. For example there were buttons that led to nowhere...

Bitweaver was lean and clean.

There are also priorities, like a support of Mediawiki (Wikipedia) syntax.
Edog
Joined: 27 Oct 2005

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:16 Apr 2007 (18:14 UTC)
I'd like to echo these sentiments. I chose bitweaver because:
  • it had a great installer
  • it met all of my requirements
  • it didn't do a ton of extra stuff that I didn't need.

Trying to install and administer TikiWiki vs. Bitweaver was a no-brainer decision to go with bitweaver. It's a bit disturbing to see this project headed in the direction of "feature overload". Sounds like TikiWiki all over again ...

Please focus on doing more in-depth QA and polish of existing features rather than constantly adding new packages. The priority for our implementation is:
  • Wiki
  • Search
  • Blogs
  • Forum
lugie
Profile Picture
Joined: 12 Jan 2006

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:17 Apr 2007 (16:01 UTC)
If you desire stars, get stars. If you desire recommends, get that. I think specific options in such trivial features is a nice thing. They really do have different concepts driving them. Why clutter up such small, efficient packages with code for other concepts when no user will ever require both at the same time?
Arnaud HERVE
Joined: 25 Oct 2004

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:20 May 2007 (18:37 UTC)
I had time to cvs update bitweaverdev and intuitively I was embarrassed to find many choices for the same use.
As a matter of fact I shifted from Linux to FreeBSD two years ago because I wanted to have optimized tools, instead of everyone dumping a non-optimized equivalent tool. I can't tell you the time I gained using FreeBSD, instead of trying countless Linux distributions!
I think that it is also the role of the CMS authors to make a choice between several equivalent tools, to get all programmers to capitalize work on it, and to propose only one to the end-user.
In that sense I think we should make a choice between the two wysiwyg editors, for instance. Yes it is ok to say "everybody makes his own choice, everybody is free", but that could extend to "People are free to adopt others CMS as they see fit". Of course they are free, but bw.org we promote bw.
When you buy a car, you don't lose time sorting out which of the three driving wheels is ok, do you? There's also a stylistic responsibility in Alfa Romeo adopting this or that driving wheel...
But my main concern is that there is a dispersion of workforce. I would have soooooo much preferred more people working on the wiki than contributing a redundant package.
Kozuch
Profile Picture
Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:23 May 2007 (17:00 UTC)
Well,

it is not easy to manage such an open source crowd for sure. What about keeping two package repositories - one "mainstream" or "supported" and the other "community" one?
lugie
Profile Picture
Joined: 12 Jan 2006

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:23 May 2007 (17:41 UTC)
Although the distinction between the two is a nice thought, I think it would taint the concept of bitweaver - it may give the impression that many things are not supported or mainstream, where in fact, the community is the most powerful thing. No money is backing bitweaver to allow us to give the main packages priority supported-ness.

My opinion: let people contribute what they will. At the core of bitweaver is "liberty" for a reason. (:cool:)

The problem you are pointing out is just one of the few downsides to creating such an abstract CMS. To me, it is of little significance compared to all the amazing advantages.

People tend to focus on things that really shouldn't be priority now and again. Attempts like this very forum topic are probably what will get people to start concentrating their efforts. This is the life of a libertarian!

LP '08!
Arnaud HERVE
Joined: 25 Oct 2004

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:23 May 2007 (19:10 UTC)
{quote format_guid="tikiwiki" comment_id="8472" user="Lugie"}
My opinion: let people contribute what they will. {/quote}

That's already done. It's called Tikiwiki.

{quote format_guid="tikiwiki" comment_id="8472" user="Lugie"}At the core of bitweaver is "liberty" for a reason. (:cool:)
{/quote}

Right, liberty is cool. No God No Master. Let everyone of us create his own bw.org website. Cool. Rebel Rebel.

Let us close this forum. No use talking. Everybody does what he wills.
Kozuch
Profile Picture
Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:24 May 2007 (18:36 UTC)
> Everybody does what he wills.

This is probably what will happen anyways!!! (:razz:)
spiderr
Profile Picture
Joined: 08 Feb 2004

Re: Endless featuring

Posted:31 Oct 2007 (19:40 UTC)
I'm late to this thread but just wanted to comment... we support both points of view here. We encourage growth in many directions, but only allow the mature packages to make it to the official distribution.

the bitweaverdev cvs module is *NOT* for general consumption as it includes just about every package ever conceived. Use the stock "bitweaver" package, and cvs checkout additional packages if need be.

Unless you are a power developer, working on low level API or CSS changes, etc. and need to grep the entire codebase, at which point you really should be using "bitweaverall"
  Page 1 of 2 »1 2 
Post
If you are already registered with bitweaver please enter your login details above.
Sorry, we have to ask.
Anonymous Post