Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hi Christian:

Le 2011-01-19 10:04, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
Hi Marc, *,

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 4:39 AM, Marc Paré<>  wrote:
Le 2011-01-18 17:57, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
As you say, people were not listening to each other. As a LibO member who
did participate on the Drupal team and helped organise it under the
impression that, clearly, the SC had given us the go ahead with the
possibility of moving on to the Drupal CMS within 6 months.

Yes, the possibility.

The proposal put
to the membership by the Drupal group was that Drupal would act more as a
hub offering windows to the various LibO communities. Somehow this also got
lost in the disinformation that was being passed around.

Yes, as the impression is that the drupal group would like to force
everything into the drupal-infrastructure.

Well, this was the wrong impression as we often times offered specific Drupal tools but also affirmed that working closely with all stakeholders was our main objective.

LO does not start completely from scratch. It has 10 years of history
it shares with the project. During that time, various
ways of collaboration have formed, various tools are used. You cannot
just throw that all away and force it all into drupal.

So, would you be OK with having a Drupal site acting as a hub directing
traffic to the different sites? This is then the question. Would it not be
more impressive to have people think that we are a whole community?

I do not get the idea why for this to work you need to force
everything into a drupal-driven tool.

My intent here with my statement was to show that the Drupal site could have provided itself more as a hub to the outside communities, contrary to the information that others were saying that, as you say, "the need to force everything into a Drupal-drivfen tool". The Drupal site would have been used no more and no less than what Silverstripe is trying to achieve today, of sending people to their different communities. The only difference being that users/visitors to the site would have the distinct impression that of a LibreOffice family.

Would it
not be more advantageous to find all of the connections in one spot? Would
not this give us all a sense of community?

Finding all in one spot is completely different in telling people.
"Sorry, you won't be using the tools you've been working with anymore,
since drupal got this shiny nice module that surely is superior"
This is the message that was received. Maybe not what was intended,
but this is at least my impression.

Remember that we were led to believe that we were told on the website membership list that the Silverstripe first then migration within 6 months to Drupal. We were letting the membership know of certain modules. We were being open and transparent and the modules were up for discussion, with implementation on the Drupal site for testing.

Yes, the urgent need for content. Unfortunately, the Silverstripe team had,
at the time, assured the SC that the site would be up and running in a
matter a few weeks.

Again you're twisting facts, just like Michael. So a history lessen of
the situation at the time:

The Drupal-proposal sites were all *NON FUNCTIONAL*, they sucked
regarding the inbuilt editor, they sucked in *BASIC* functionality.
While silverstripe was ready to be used.

At no time I or anyone else had made a claim about creating the
content itself. The statement was always "Allow people to start
working on it".

And yes, I also was disappointed that there have not been people who
were eager waiting to providing the content, there my (and other
people's) impression was wrong.

But don't claim that silverstripe-team promised a complete site!

Then yes, we did misunderstand the Silverstripe approach. You then delivered a functional working site.

The Drupal team had plans on involving people with content. I guess we had a more holistic approach to website building. There were offers from a couple of Drupal devs with ongoing mentoring/facilitating help for contributors and the use of the Drupal site modules.

We were led to believe that all of the site would just
be available to all for use in so little time.

For use, yes, and that really was a matter of days to setup the
DNS-entry and silverstripe was up and running (at the location at the time). From that point on it was
ready to use, working.

What was not said, is that,
in fact, the Silverstripe had not prepared any IA or any sort of planning

You are a liar, and that more or less represent the communication
style of the drupal-team as a whole. Those who voice their opinion
twist the facts at their will.

Thanks then, could you point me to the pages that we had asked for on the website list? There must be a place where we can all see the Silverstripe plans for us to see. If the website membership had seen that there were no plans for content then perhaps we could have helped make provisions for this.

for the actual web development and that it would be done on a "first come
first serve" meritocratic way. Unfortunately, it was, and still is, quite
difficult to find any members experienced enough in Silverstripe

Again complete bullshit. You can count the "problem" reports with
silverstripe people posted to the list with your fingers. You don't
need to have experience with silverstripe to provide content.

There is no need for experienced silverstripe people because there is
no need of fancy features yet.

Sorry, I just thought that experienced Silverstripe people would be lending a hand at helping the content contributors manage and work out the formatting of their sites. How many Silverstripe people do we have to help out? Is there anyone on the Silverstripe actively helping NL content contributors so that their sites look good at first landing?

As for adding content, well, why was this not planned when the SC was
assured that the site would be ready within a short time frame? So, the
excuse for having no content for the Silverstripe site is that the Drupal
team were being too organised or that they were negligent in providing
content? I would find it strange that for some reason, ALL of the content
contributors were on the Drupal side? Then why was Silverstripe chosen?

AGAIN: Silverstripe was *ready to use*. Drupal sites at the time *DID
SUCK*. All there was was "there are modules for drupal, and once you
configure it it won't suck". This did go on for weeks, without anybody
installing those modules, configuring the drupal site (remember, there
were four different drupal demo sites at the time, and *NONE* featured
a working editor.
*NONE* offered an easy way to insert links to another page on the same
site, etc.

Despite all the people knowing drupal, despite all the people dealing
with drupal for their living.

/*THIS*/ is what made the SC made their decision.

People need a tool that /works/, not a system that /works once it is
configured/. And it isn't enough to assure "you can do it, thousands
of sites are running with drupal, drupal is great, bla bla". If you
cannot get the basics to work right within a couple of weeks, you're
out of the question.

Silverstipre's editor and site management was working right out of the box.

And this has nothing to do with the content, which is completely
independent of the underlying CMS. So yes, if drupal team now claims
they have put so much effort into designing a IA and thinking about
content: Why didn't they just implement it on the site that was

We thought that you had included it in your plans. Maybe the words that you would provide a working website confused us. We assumed, as was stated before, that this meant along with plans for content. And, yes, I for one jumped in and completed a whole section of the site only to have it deleted without consultation. I also believe that another member had commented that going about it this way, deleting contributor content without consultation, would perhaps dissuade more contribution.

Sadly, the constant reminder that the Drupal CMS solution is not dead and
may be considered later is disheartening. This is just saying, that, if the
Silverstripe site doesn't work,

If you got a problem with the functionality of the site, then say so.

WHAT doesn't work (because the site runs silverstripe, not because
just nobody provided some content)?

Sorry, you are mis-reading my sentence and completely taking it out of context.

well, we will be sorry to everyone and move
to Drupal anyway. Regardless of any outcome, the SC will just have to come
to terms with the fact that, for a large site such as LbiO with a potential
of 100 million users/downloads, most serious devs would recommend the use of
a Drupal CMS solution. You will constantly have to explain your reasons for
picking Silverstripe ... or maybe just add it to a FAQ.

Again the same FUD again and again. Yes, Drupal is great, but within
nearly two months (during the CMS requirements phase), all those
knowledgeable people didn't manage to create something usable. That's
why SC did vote to go with Silverstripe, with the possibility to
revisit drupal a couple of months later.
But instead of providing a working site with the basics, Drupal team
started their "we conquer the world" crusade and that lead to the
current statement to get a grip of the priorities that matter.

I think if you re-read the start of the CMS search for LibO, you will find that your answers to anyone making reference with Drupal was met with a negative tone from you. Feel free to re-read your posts. You had discounted Drupal right from the start.

It seems to me that most groups would want to look for a CMS that best fits their needs, consult with their membership (in this case our website membership) and test-try collaboratively different CMS sites to see how well they work and fit with the community project. I don't believe that making it into a confrontational test of "who can make it work first before a deadline" was the best approach. It disregards all of the professional advice from the membership who signed on to help with website building. For which we are still struggling with. This is not the way to build community, rather, it splits communities.




Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.