lenya-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jürgen Ragaller <ragal...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Reconsidering the roadmap
Date Sat, 17 May 2008 08:34:40 GMT
Hi lenya devs

Andreas Hartmann wrote:

> to plan the future of Lenya, reconsidering our general roadmap is  
> IMO a
> necessary prerequisite. Here's the status that we had agreed during  
> one
> of the first roadmap meetings several years ago. The scale is 0-7. The
> first number is what we thought about how good Lenya was, the second  
> is
> the goal we wanted to reach.
>    Community:                  1 (5)
>    Low Entry Barrier:          2 (4)
>    Product Maturity:           2 (5)
>    Industrial Strength:        5 (5)
>    Off The Shelf Components:   4 (4)
>    Feature Set:                3 (4)
>    Standards Compliance:       6 (6)
>    Usability:                  5 (6)
> IMO the situation has changed a bit. Here's my personal opinion what  
> it
> looks like today and should look like in the future:
>    Community:                  2 (4)
>    Low Entry Barrier:          2 (2)
>    Product Maturity:           5 (6)
>    Industrial Strength:        5 (6)
>    Off The Shelf Components:   4 (4)
>    Feature Set:                3 (3)
>    Standards Compliance:       6 (6)
>    Usability:                  5 (5)
> My target numbers for Community and Low Entry Barrier are rather low.
> IMO we have no chance if we try to compete with the popular PHP  
> systems
> like Typo3 and Joomla. We'd have to change our focus entirely. The
> enterprise DMS market targeted by big players like Alfresco and a  
> lot of
> commercial systems is also very hard to penetrate.
> IMO Lenya has the best chances to gain acceptance if we focus on  
> what we
> do best:
>    Standards Compliance (XML, XSLT, no home-grown database  
> schema, ...)
>    Industrial Strength (Cocoon, Java, EAI options, ...)

I totally agree to that.

Continuing our (roadmap)-discussion about JCR and the new born cocoon  
2.2 will be interesting.

Andreas: I'm looking forward to your JCR / sling presentations!

> As far as the feature set is concerned, IMO 2.0 is a big step forward.
> We don't have that many features in the ASF project (which IMO is a  
> good
> thing, given the community size), but it has become much easier to add
> features in projects. I have the feeling, though, that not many people
> know this. Selecting a CMS is probably still a matter of comparing
> feature lists. This raises the question of 3rd party modules again.

A place for 3rd party modules would be interesting.

Ideally the whole lenya community benefits from it - users can share  
their modules and through that communicate about the technique,  
developers get a sense for what is beeing achieved with the new  
framework, what's missing, unclear etc. Maybe what common pitfals  
there are, or what would make sense as core functionality.

Well designed, useful / popular modules might be integrated over time  
to modules-optional?

We could let users chose a license or we can make the agreement to the  
asf license mandatory.


To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lenya.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lenya.apache.org

View raw message