Zikula Community

• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 02:11 PM

  ..thinking about the docs and forum support:
  
  my thought has been that of a more uncentralized management system.. management being made up of representatives from each team, with the central management for approving larger decisions/expansion/deal with funding.. they too should be able to assign teams to tasks, like establishing the non-profit organization status.
  
  designation of new teams would be a collaborative effort of the representatives with the initial approval by the central mgmt.
  
  for sake of example the Support and Docs should be one "area" of control and should be managed by Michael and Simon (IMO..both very strong, very commited and have a wealth of experience in all areas)..
  
  their Team should be increased, by at least 4 people. time being the most significant factor, not everyone is available at all times, but increasing the staff should increase "productivity".
  
  I think more meetings (or a forum) should be held, possibly monthly, to gather an itinerary and set goals...
  
  Michael and Simon should be able to assign or elect certain members or groups to certain tasks and those members or groups should be encouraged to utilize the tools available to them, including willing contributors from the community.
  
  The development team and the support team do share the same list and I feel their collaboration has been effective. I don't see any breakdown within the dev team, it's strengths and structure under Mark and Andreas are the basis for these suggestions.
  
  I feel a design team is needed. The same structure should apply. I'd really like to stress the importance of this one. A team of graphic designers and/or themers to produce media releases, partake in publications, create core themes, modifying core module templates.. etc.. etc..etc. international communities should be considered for these roles as well.
  
  another that I feel absolutely necessary: a marketing team. to manage regularly scheduled contests and events, promotionals, interviews, data mining, etc..
  
  as mentioned in another thread in this forum was the creation of a certification system for our international support sites, which appears to be a welcomed concept. I'd suggest David Nelson who handles translations/languages to tap a partner to form an "international" team. Coordinating with international community heads and distributing the aforementioned itineraries and press releases.
  
  
  ..just a few thoughts. proof of concepts of sorts..
  
  
  thanks for reading.. input appreciated.
  -IR
  
  PS: I'll be updating this post with more suggestions..

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 877

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 03:34 PM

  Good luck. Until the will of the users is given reasonable (any really) consideration, I doubt you could get volunteers to fill the roles.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 03:42 PM

  I agree.. there have been quite a few users who were willing to make substantial contributions.. there was talk, some more talk and then nothing. It's concerning.. and that's why I started this thread.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 877

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 04:27 PM

  I think the management of Postnuke is really quite good, but having said that I don't really think they are particularly open to suggestions. I don't really mean that as criticism given the very large amounts of free time they contribute, but I do think a more open management process might attract more volunteers.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 04:53 PM

  ..I'm thinking in distribution of weight. every time "something" crops up it's kinda left to management to deal with, impliment or assign.. I think a lot of these "somethings" can be expedited at other levels.. freeing the central management of smaller tasks. I don't know that suggestions are welcomed or not.. just thought I'd put in a few cents.. that's all.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Registered User
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Aug 31, 2005
  • Posts: 13

  Posted: Mar 16, 2005 - 11:50 PM

  Hi.

  Quote

  as mentioned in another thread in this forum was the creation of a certification system for our international support sites, which appears to be a welcomed concept. I'd suggest David Nelson who handles translations/languages to tap a partner to form an "international" team. Coordinating with international community heads and distributing the aforementioned itineraries and press releases

  
  Maybe I can help with this, if you need a spanish community or someone for that team :)
  
  

  Quote

  The development team and the support team do share the same list and I feel their collaboration has been effective. I don't see any breakdown within the dev team, it's strengths and structure under Mark and Andreas are the basis for these suggestions.

  
  As you know I'm a programmer so if you need help with any module or block or anything I can help ;)

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 842

  Posted: Mar 17, 2005 - 02:07 AM

  I haven't been around as much as I used to be. As many are aware, I've been lobbying the department I work for in the Canadian government to incorporate Postnuke (actually, my slightly modified version of it) as a standard across our networks. Following a review of PN though, the proposal's been squashed, mostly due to the fact that there was no management of the software, from the review committee's perspective. They did a fair amount of research and came back with the impression that PN is not "officially" supported by anything/anyone and therefore wasn't comfortable in making it a standard. I don't have access to the full decision, but the lack of visible management was a giant factor.
  
  So, I've had to refocus my efforts and have been working on creating an ASP CMS. It's a shame that I will no longer be able to develop with PN during my working day.
  
  That said, I am finding myself very much agreeing with IR's thoughts in his original post above. This project needs a kick in the ass in a lot of different areas (actual coding not being one of them, as Mark and Andreas do a great job leading that team). How long has "development" of a new front page for the web site being happening? Everyone agrees that changes need to be made, but here we are, more than a year after it was being "addressed".
  
  I still love PN, and I enjoy being a part of the PNCommunity. I still use PN for my personal sites, and will continue to help out wherever I can. It's a shame that so much potential is laying dormant under the current system, and I can only hope that people like IR are listened to and their advice and experience tapped to recover this terrific application.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 877

  Posted: Mar 17, 2005 - 02:24 AM

  Sorry to hear that Spire. I wonder what exactly would have persuaded management to come to a different decision.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 842

  Posted: Mar 17, 2005 - 02:43 AM

  Honestly, I could spout off a bunch of things to support my agenda, but the truth is, I don't really know what could have changed their minds. I do know what kinds of software they DO back though, and that is applications where they have a direct conduit to getting immediate assistance when needed. I made the name of the Postnuke PM available, so they may have contacted Vanessa to discuss it. Either they didn't like the answer or maybe they didn't even get that far, I dunno.
  
  I do know, from members of my own team, that PN suffers from it's appearance. There are many great folks working on it, but very little leadership. And when a great leadership decision is made (IMO), it's bashed by the community. Harry's recent proposal in the Mailing List that got hammered (those in the list know what I speak of) is a great example. A good step forward, (again, IMO) which was met with crippling resistance.
  
  It's things like this, the damned if they do, damned if they don't environment the current pnMGMT is in that has crippled the momentum of PN. Simply, possibly by no fault of MGMT, the current system isn't working to get the stuff done that needs to be done.
  
  Solutions? MGMT needs to be more assertive. pnCommunity needs to let the MGMT make decisions. Structure needs to be in place to ensure these decisions follow standard operating procedures (SOPs). Tasking must be set forth and deliverables published.
  
  Sorry to get all "project management-y" on everyone, but I work with this stuff all day and I see the deficiencies in the current system.
  
  Now, I await the flames :)

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 17, 2005 - 03:33 AM

  in regards to the "proposal": I think Mark and Andreas have a very firm grasp on the direction of the application and it should be left entirely in their capable hands.. my thoughts on distribution of "weight" or management is based on their success. Generally speaking, it's the area that recieves the most notable growth.
  
  My suggestions are not meant to be "anti-management", who's right or who's wrong, but more about the balance of a greater workload, which IMO is necessary for growth and to sustain the current community.
  
  cheers :)

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 877

  Posted: Mar 17, 2005 - 04:17 PM

  Well there is one reality that I have to occasionally remind myself of. That is the fact that I've remained a loyal postnuke user since the beginning despite my criticisms of managment. I've tried most or all of the competition, but I still keep coming back here. That is to the credit PN management. I do think PN could make the step to the next level if we focused on the right things. And I have been vocal in my views that we are focusing on the wrong things. Unfortunately, I've never felt that I had any influence on anything around here. I'm not saying that I should, particularly, but I don't think my contributions have been entirely without merit in the community.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 18, 2005 - 01:31 AM

  More management just divides tasks into subsects.. with the central management at the center.. it empowers them, not weakens them. I've seen criticisms and IMO and experience this would alleviate criticisms and increase cooperation.
  
  Being vocal doesn't necessarily mean you're right :) ..unless you've got significant (read "more") experience in an area, it remains a suggestion.. I don't think any of the team heads are above admitting error.. and the end goal is the same with everyone.. "quality" ..no matter where you go, suggestions are always considered, even if for a second. window times vary to build a case. No one's paying any attention to this thread, but to me, I'm just glad I made an attempt at remedy instead of pushing blame, pointing fingers and demanding results.. I'm not that confident to assume it's the "golden solution".. it's just food for thought.. to be considered..even if for a second. :)
  
  My intentions are always in the best of PostNuke..they may not always seem to be. I can guess that sometimes it's seen as disruptive or counter-productive.. but whether anyone chooses to recognize it or not, an impact is made. and hopefully it's the intended impact and the long-term results are positive. It's extrordinarily silly to give so much time, thought and effort to the betterment of an application, but when you do as regularly as a lot of us do, you inevitably make an impression on PN and the community..whether anyone's patting you on the back, kicking you in the shins or hardly paying attention.. your contributions exist.
  
  We need more active people, we need more suggestions, more contributions, more disagreement, more assertive "policy" and more pride. But.. that's just my opinion. to be considered. ;)
  
  ..i'm sure you can relate.

  • 
  •  
• Slugger
  
  

  • Rank: Expert
  • Registered: Mar 11, 2003
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 1104

  Posted: Mar 18, 2005 - 08:04 AM

  Sudden changes in avatars...I'm thinking we're dealing with a plot. Admit it! You're not IR, you're a subversive mole planted by evil doers who intend to undermine PostNuke and corrupt our youth.
  
  Actually, you guys have made some good points and I appreciate your taking the time to brain session on this subject. IR, you referred to a previous thread about certifying international sites. I'm not against that per se and I might even be convinced to be in favor of it. I'm pretty agnostic.
  
  Perhaps making the international portals accountable to a single certifying body would prevent fragmentation but isn't it also possible that a bunch of "certified" sites might be confusing and actually promote fragmentation and decentralization of the PostNuke community?
  
  And how do you "pull the plug" on a certified site that suddenly decides to not do, whatever it is, that is required for certification?
  
  If the goal is to broaden international appeal, couldn't that be done by making PostNuke.com more international? france.postnuke.com; italy.postnuke.com; mexico.postnuke.com; brazil.postnuke.com; newzealand.postnuke.com; markwest.postnuke.com ; etc. Maybe do it by continents or, now here's an idea, by language.
  
  Since we're on the topic of certification, I'd like to bring up something else that has been brought up in the past-certifying contributions. At one time, that would have been impossible but that was then.
  
  It used to be that a new hack, module, block, or theme was introduced daily. Sometimes many times a day; but that hasn't been the case for quite some time.
  
  I don't see this as a sign of waning interest. I see it as evidence of maturation of the fork and an increasingly stable core. At one time there were a lot of empty needs; now (I believe) we're moving toward refinement of existing contributions.
  
  That said, I do think it's possible now to start certifying contributions and I think this is something that should be considered.
  
  Certifying contributions will address some of the issues Spire2000 raised. Valid issues, I might add.
  
  I think it will also help nurture the newbies and promote growth of the PN base. How so? By improving communication and by removing some of the risk of trying new contributions. I've long worried over the naming of contributions and this too will be dealt with by certification.
  
  Thanks again for the discussion.
  
  Slugger

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Helper
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 877

  Posted: Mar 18, 2005 - 08:13 AM

  Man I with I had some youth left to corrupt.

  • 
  •  
• **unknown user**
  
  

  • Rank: Senior
  • Registered: Mar 16, 2002
  • Last visit: Oct 21, 2009
  • Posts: 2204

  Posted: Mar 18, 2005 - 08:25 AM

  warrick

  Man I with I had some youth left to corrupt.

  
  you wish you could spell.. :)
  
  good points Slugger.. I'll address them in a while.. I'm at work.

  • 
  •  
•  
•  

Users on-line

• 0 users

This list is based on users active over the last 60 minutes.