Going back to one of your points - "the default modules being crap" - don't forget that shortly no default modules will be packaged with Xoops, so the new user can download the latest news, forum, content, media etc module.

Taking over undeveloped modules? Well the repository reorganisation may not have been 100% popular - but it will mean that some modules are not lost.

I don't agree with what all you said, but if I look at what you mean consisely - it boils down to "reorganisation and tidying will make XOOPS better". If thats what you mean, then give the people who are trying to do this time... we do have lives away from this system, but we are working on this!

Two items I would like to address:

1) Taking over modules to make them better and release them with the core

This, we will not do. We are currently 6 core developers, each with other projects of our own (full time jobs, module development, that kind of thing). Taking over other projects and make them "ours" is not the idea of taking the modules out of the core - on the contrary, we want to be clear of having to support modules and able to pick the best, we can find, so we can focus on making XOOPS as good as we can.

I'm sure that when you find a module that you can make better, the developer(s) would love to work with you on doing that.

2) WYSIWYG Editor
It's on the to-do list for 2.2, but there are unresolved issues like how to manage the editors (selecting which editor to use - per user? - should the toolbar options be manageable by the site admin? or the user? Or not at all?) and I have also a concern as to how the content is stored and displayed. I believe the Koivi editor requires that you allow HTML in the post - meaning that we would need a way to filter out unwanted HTML (<form>, <button> and similar) and leave the wanted (<a>, <b>, <i> etc.). Something which is not done, yet, I think.

Then there is the issue of how to add another editor, later - the implementation must be modular.

So it is not just a matter of implementing the WYSIWYG Editor Framework, but takes more work. If anyone wants to help with resolving the issues, phppp is the man to contact.

Quote:
I agree with David on this. ANd I'd like to extend the invitation I have made on these forums many times, please join the efforts! It's a question of resources, not power. My own resources are low at the moment due to time constraints. So I need all the help I can get! But, working together, towards the same end.
XOOPS.org is not powered by a (paid or unpaid) staff of people whose dayjobs are to manage XOOPS and maintain xoops.org and make all the wishlists from community posts, reply to all support requests, write newsletters, code the core, check every module for bugs, set all requirements and checks if everyone abides by them, promotes XOOPS to the rest of the world, etc. etc. etc. And all towards the same end. No, it's powered by people like yourselves, who take on a small share of the huge load, and together make it more then the sum of it's parts. XOOPS is a community effort, which means you get the benefits, but also the responisbilities. And people need to step up and take the responsibilitty if they see a chance to make it better.

My job, as I see it, it to try and get everyone working towards the same end. And I'm definately not perfect in that end, and there needs to be done a lot more to get it that way. But that is not possible to do overnight, and I have been preparing a lot already. So bare with me for a bit, and if you want to join the effort, let me know, you're always welcome!

Herko

Herko,

I know there are several projects going to improve XOOPS (organization) as a whole. A also remember reading (maybe in the liaison topic) about putting up a wanted section, or something to that extend. If this is going to happen, is it for vacant positions in the entire organization, or just for the liaison team? Has anyone looked at needed positions throughout the entire organization? If no, how about an inventory? (right word for it? dutch: inventarisatie). You’ve repeated your invitation to contribute several times, but why not organize that invitation as mentioned above? Establish what the needs for the project are, determine the people (talents, knowledge) required for the job and put up a wanted section with job descriptions.

This is just a thought, maybe even already discussed and or decided on. Naturally I don’t/can’t read everything discussed on the Xoopsfora.

We are still settling on the details as well as finding the ones, who should actually make the ideas come through, but my money is on the suggestion that we will make application forms for the various organisational units with a description of what is needed for each unit.

Then the user can fill in the form(s) and a notification go to the person in charge for that organisational unit.

I assume the points you mention aren’t discussed publicly? Not that I really have a problem with that, makes a discussion more organized, but doesn’t a subject like this require input from the community? As they are the ones you’ll be trying to reach and mobilize to work on the improvement of XOOPS in all aspects.

If this discussion is public and I missed it, just ignore me

You mean the community knows what the core development team needs in a person wanting to join?

I think I am misunderstanding you, because you just said that Herko should be more specific in what he asked for - and now you say that the community should be involved... I'm most definitely misunderstanding something

Mutual misunderstanding I think

I wasn’t just talking about coredevs, but the organization as a whole, meaning all teams/departments involved in the community. Core development is, although undoubtedly extremely important, not the only area where more manpower is needed. And obviously no one knows everything about everything. In decisions concerning the, let’s call it job descriptions, concerning things like marketing, communication, etc. outside knowledge might prove invaluable.

Hope I made my point more readable/understandable

the core development team was just an example.

The whole point is to make outsiders become insiders, but I'm still unsure as to what it is, you expect the public discussion to yield.

We are not talking about job descriptions with fixed requirements, but a form like this:

[Description of the team and what it does]
name: (or other identifier - possibly automatic)
what is your motivation for joining:
what can you contribute to the team:
how well do you know XOOPS' inner workings (for core dev team application form):
how much time can you spare for team work:

That kind of thing. It is not about where the team should focus its efforts or what it should do - just what we need to know about the people wanting to join.

I was more thinking along the line of what talents/knowledge are/is currently needed. If the point of that particular discussion is only to know what you need to know from people applying, then no, an open discussion wouldn’t really contribute.

Now that you gave an example of the form: I understand that people can apply to a team and add their preference to the kind of work they can and are willing to do? (in the ‘what can you contribute to the team:’ textbox) Are the positions needed in the different teams defined in the ‘[Description of the team and what it does]’ text, or can you just apply and suggest a particular form of contribution.

I ask the questions stated above because that was pretty much the whole point of my posts. Imho people would respond sooner if ‘job descriptions’ are at least slightly defined within each team. I for one would really like to contribute any way I can, but I never responded to Herko’s calls for contribution because I never really had any idea what my knowledge would be best suited for. Those kinds of decisions might just be made easier by a more direct approach, as in saying: “We need a person who wants to do this and that” Kind of like a personnel add I guess.

I Hope I make any sense and not tiring you with my ongoing comments