A couple big ideas: cosmo release and server project merge

On 2/3/06, Ted Leung <twlosafoundation.org>
wrote:

> A better/more efficient community -- the last few
messages have been
> about why having two communities was wrong and how we
should have one
> so that we can be more efficient, etc.   Today it's the
case that
> people working on Cosmo care about Scooby and vice
versa, but I don't
> think that will be true in the future.  What happens
when there's
> enough traffic to have *-user lists?  You're probably
going to have
> cosmo-user and scooby user.

fair enough.

i've exhausted my energy for caring about the issue of
unifying the
two porojects, which means that it really must not be that
important
to me 
it was just an off the cuff suggestion.

> A project is a community of people who are working on a
code base
> together.    With snarf, I didn't feel that just the
packaging code/
> build scripts was worth starting a whole separate
community for.

i agree, and that was never my intention. maybe people
assumed it was
when i made that wiki page. dunno.

> You didn't like the alternative that I proposed which
was that you
> put the build scripts etc for snarf in a subdirectory
of scooby, and
> make the snarf download available from the scooby
downloads page.

right. so what about the folks who come to the cosmo
community looking
for a turnkey calendar server. do we tell them they've come
to the
wrong place and need to go to the fancy web calendar ui
project to
find the calendar server download?

you say "ok, put it into the cosmo project
instead". what about the
people who come to scooby looking for an integrated web
calendar
bundle? do the scooby folks tell them to go to the server
project to
find the download?

which option is better? is either any good at all?

at the end of the day i think we need to work the hardest to
cater to
the people coming to look for the all in one thinger. they
are the
ones who are going to be least excited about going from page
to page
looking for the thing to download. they are the ones who
should have a
very simple page with a big red arrow saying DOWNLOAD HERE,
and that
page should be in the first, most obvious  place they might
think to
look. i don't think that's going to turn out to be either
the scooby
or cosmo projects.

i think there is tremendous value in a huge flashing neon
sign saying
"OSAF SHARING SERVER! GET IT HERE! FREE 4 U!",
putting the integrated
bundle there, and saying "interested in exploring the
components of
this bundle? click here and here and here and here and
here." maybe
this is just a new landing page and not a new project wiki
or anything
of the sort, but then where does the documentation go? the
cosmo and
scooby docs are on their project wikis.

i know i do a pretty poor job of articulating my thoughts
most of the
time, but i really hope that you're getting my point that
the
integrated bundle isn't just another download option but is
most
likely going to be the thing that attracts the most users -
not
developers, not project contributors, but actual users. i
think it's
such an important thing that it should have its own
identity. i'm not
sure if that has to mean it deserves project status, but it
definitely
means that we need to give it *some* sort of special
treatment.
_______________________________________________
Cosmo mailing list
Cosmoosafoundation.org
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo

A couple big ideas: cosmo release and server project merge

Thread: A couple big ideas: cosmo release and server project merge