The future of Zend Framework

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The future of Zend Framework

Walter Tamboer
Hello everyone,
 
In this e-mail I would like to share my feelings about Zend Framework and its community. This e-mail will look like a rant but please remember that I have the best intentions.
 
A couple of years ago I started working with Zend Framework. Like many of you I loved its structure from the start. The fact that it doesn't force me to work in a certain
way like many other frameworks do feels liberated. I see ZF as a foundation layer for applications one could make. Every component within ZF serves its purpose in an abstract way.
 
Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of this framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am now focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is incredibly invisble. Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails where new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1 in May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about the quallity of a proposal which might attract responding to it or not. The point I am trying to make is that there is absolutely no feedback from the ZF team. The same goes for proposals made by other people. One thing I'd like to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I do not blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a lack of interest int their contributors. They AT LEAST should respond to a new proposal since a person is doing work for them.
 
I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a business. Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening here? They will quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That really makes me sad since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My working colleagues have the same feeling. Why propose something if you get no feedback from the decision makers anyway?
 
Ok. A lot of negativity here. Again, I do not want to make people look or feel bad so let's turn this e-mail into something positive. I know other people feel the same, I have had discussions in IRC channels before. I even think that the ZF team itself feels the same about this (how can they not?). So how do we find a solution for this (admitting it is a problem)?
 
First of all, one thing that I think of as a big problem is the accessibility of the framework. I think the mailing list is not inviting people to participate. I personally hate it since I am receiving tons of emails everyday. Archiving the mails and searching through them is even more a pain in the ass. There for I feel a forum is more suitable for a project like Zend Framework. It also makes it more accessible for people to ask questions (like zfforums). Oh and btw; don't come with a response that there is an archive on nabble. That is the most disgusting piece of software on the web ;-)
 
My next suggestion is to redesign the website. I would like to make a more central place for developers beside the wiki. I am thinking about:
- Voting on features to see what the interest of the community is;
- An "idea box" for people that would like to see new features but don't want to develop them;
- Team descriptions, who is responsible for what?
- A roadmap. What is the planning of everything? I don't want to see some very vaque roadmap from some issue tracker. No it should be readable.
 
This probably means that some things should be migrated from the wiki to the website it self but I believe that it will result in a more structured communication style.

I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is the lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to when you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported a bug about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.
 
So how do we get this done? I think we need to divide the framework contributors in smaller teams. Usually more hierarchy results in more bureaucracy but they way it's going now is just not working. Have people to be responsible for managing the website. Have people to be responsible to managing questions on the forum and make sure that all the leads get the correct information when needed. Have meetings between leads to discuss the planning of things and make it all transparant. There is no secret in managing ZF but
at least make it clear what is going one. Don't forget that companies actually rely on this piece of software.
 
I think I'll leave it to this for now since I could talk on and on about this. The conclusion of this e-mail is that:
- I am not happy with the way the framework is managed right now. I know everyone is doing their best but people only have so much time. (delegate!!!)
- I want more feedback and quicker responses.
- I would like to see a more transparant communication style about the framework.
 
Please, please, please try to understand how I feel and share your feelings as well.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Derek Miranda
<base href="x-msg://401/">Usually my email responses on this list never seem to be delivered (I get an auto reply saying my message was not acceptable) and I haven't bothered to respond in quite a while, but this prompted me to give it another shot. 

I have to say, I completely agree with Walter. Just this morning I wanted to find the latest on ZF2 and after bouncing around a bunch of different sites and resources, I came to the conclusion that there is no one place for all information, clear and concise. Maybe this resource does exist, but if it does, it hasn't been easy to find. 

As far as proposals go, I never bothered to write any because I ultimately felt, well, what's the point? I have watched with great anticipation the proposal for a Zend_Image component which people have been literally begging for, but the proposal has gone no where. How is it possible that something utilized so often as image manipulation in a Web 2.0 world has not found itself in a modern framework? This isn't a new proposal, it's been there for years. And, there was no clear indication as to wether the component would be approved or coded in days, weeks, years. When? I ended up writing my own. 

In short, way to go, Walter. Something has got to give.

On Feb 28, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Walter Tamboer wrote:

Hello everyone,
 
In this e-mail I would like to share my feelings about Zend Framework and its community. This e-mail will look like a rant but please remember that I have the best intentions.
 
A couple of years ago I started working with Zend Framework. Like many of you I loved its structure from the start. The fact that it doesn't force me to work in a certain
way like many other frameworks do feels liberated. I see ZF as a foundation layer for applications one could make. Every component within ZF serves its purpose in an abstract way.
 
Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of this framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am now focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is incredibly invisble. Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails where new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1 in May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about the quallity of a proposal which might attract responding to it or not. The point I am trying to make is that there is absolutely no feedback from the ZF team. The same goes for proposals made by other people. One thing I'd like to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I do not blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a lack of interest int their contributors. They AT LEAST should respond to a new proposal since a person is doing work for them.
 
I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a business. Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening here? They will quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That really makes me sad since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My working colleagues have the same feeling. Why propose something if you get no feedback from the decision makers anyway?
 
Ok. A lot of negativity here. Again, I do not want to make people look or feel bad so let's turn this e-mail into something positive. I know other people feel the same, I have had discussions in IRC channels before. I even think that the ZF team itself feels the same about this (how can they not?). So how do we find a solution for this (admitting it is a problem)?
 
First of all, one thing that I think of as a big problem is the accessibility of the framework. I think the mailing list is not inviting people to participate. I personally hate it since I am receiving tons of emails everyday. Archiving the mails and searching through them is even more a pain in the ass. There for I feel a forum is more suitable for a project like Zend Framework. It also makes it more accessible for people to ask questions (like zfforums). Oh and btw; don't come with a response that there is an archive on nabble. That is the most disgusting piece of software on the web ;-)
 
My next suggestion is to redesign the website. I would like to make a more central place for developers beside the wiki. I am thinking about:
- Voting on features to see what the interest of the community is;
- An "idea box" for people that would like to see new features but don't want to develop them;
- Team descriptions, who is responsible for what?
- A roadmap. What is the planning of everything? I don't want to see some very vaque roadmap from some issue tracker. No it should be readable.
 
This probably means that some things should be migrated from the wiki to the website it self but I believe that it will result in a more structured communication style.

I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is the lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to when you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported a bug about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.
 
So how do we get this done? I think we need to divide the framework contributors in smaller teams. Usually more hierarchy results in more bureaucracy but they way it's going now is just not working. Have people to be responsible for managing the website. Have people to be responsible to managing questions on the forum and make sure that all the leads get the correct information when needed. Have meetings between leads to discuss the planning of things and make it all transparant. There is no secret in managing ZF but
at least make it clear what is going one. Don't forget that companies actually rely on this piece of software.
 
I think I'll leave it to this for now since I could talk on and on about this. The conclusion of this e-mail is that:
- I am not happy with the way the framework is managed right now. I know everyone is doing their best but people only have so much time. (delegate!!!)
- I want more feedback and quicker responses.
- I would like to see a more transparant communication style about the framework.
 
Please, please, please try to understand how I feel and share your feelings as well.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

weierophinney
Administrator
-- Derek Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Tuesday, 28 February 2012, 03:43 PM -0500):
> I have to say, I completely agree with Walter. Just this morning I wanted to
> find the latest on ZF2 and after bouncing around a bunch of different sites and
> resources, I came to the conclusion that there is no one place for all
> information, clear and concise. Maybe this resource does exist, but if it does,
> it hasn't been easy to find.

http://framework.zend.com/zf2

> As far as proposals go, I never bothered to write any because I ultimately
> felt, well, what's the point? I have watched with great anticipation the
> proposal for a Zend_Image component which people have been literally begging
> for, but the proposal has gone no where. How is it possible that something
> utilized so often as image manipulation in a Web 2.0 world has not found itself
> in a modern framework? This isn't a new proposal, it's been there for years.
> And, there was no clear indication as to wether the component would be approved
> or coded in days, weeks, years. When? I ended up writing my own.

The original scope of it was to provide equivalent functionality on top
of both GD and ImageMagick. The authors worked for many months on it,
but in the end felt they couldn't accomplish a unified API.

Remember, please, that most people working on the framework are
_volunteers_. Things get done when people have time. Proposals include
contact information... so that if you want to help and have time, you
can reach out.

I'll reply more to Walter's email shortly.

> In short, way to go, Walter. Something has got to give.
>
> On Feb 28, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Walter Tamboer wrote:
>
>
>     Hello everyone,
>      
>     In this e-mail I would like to share my feelings about Zend Framework and
>     its community. This e-mail will look like a rant but please remember that I
>     have the best intentions.
>      
>     A couple of years ago I started working with Zend Framework. Like many of
>     you I loved its structure from the start. The fact that it doesn't force me
>     to work in a certain
>     way like many other frameworks do feels liberated. I see ZF as a foundation
>     layer for applications one could make. Every component within ZF serves its
>     purpose in an abstract way.
>      
>     Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of this
>     framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am now
>     focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is incredibly
>     invisble. Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails
>     where new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new
>     proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1 in
>     May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a discussion
>     about the quallity of a proposal which might attract responding to it or
>     not. The point I am trying to make is that there is absolutely no feedback
>     from the ZF team. The same goes for proposals made by other people. One
>     thing I'd like to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I
>     do not blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a
>     lack of interest int their contributors. They AT LEAST should respond to a
>     new proposal since a person is doing work for them.
>      
>     I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a business.
>     Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening here? They will
>     quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That really makes me sad
>     since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My working colleagues have
>     the same feeling. Why propose something if you get no feedback from the
>     decision makers anyway?
>      
>     Ok. A lot of negativity here. Again, I do not want to make people look or
>     feel bad so let's turn this e-mail into something positive. I know other
>     people feel the same, I have had discussions in IRC channels before. I even
>     think that the ZF team itself feels the same about this (how can they
>     not?). So how do we find a solution for this (admitting it is a problem)?
>      
>     First of all, one thing that I think of as a big problem is the
>     accessibility of the framework. I think the mailing list is not inviting
>     people to participate. I personally hate it since I am receiving tons of
>     emails everyday. Archiving the mails and searching through them is even
>     more a pain in the ass. There for I feel a forum is more suitable for a
>     project like Zend Framework. It also makes it more accessible for people to
>     ask questions (like zfforums). Oh and btw; don't come with a response that
>     there is an archive on nabble. That is the most disgusting piece of
>     software on the web ;-)
>      
>     My next suggestion is to redesign the website. I would like to make a more
>     central place for developers beside the wiki. I am thinking about:
>     - Voting on features to see what the interest of the community is;
>     - An "idea box" for people that would like to see new features but don't
>     want to develop them;
>     - Team descriptions, who is responsible for what?
>     - A roadmap. What is the planning of everything? I don't want to see some
>     very vaque roadmap from some issue tracker. No it should be readable.
>      
>     This probably means that some things should be migrated from the wiki to
>     the website it self but I believe that it will result in a more structured
>     communication style.
>
>     I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is
>     the lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to
>     when you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported
>     a bug about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
>     Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.
>      
>     So how do we get this done? I think we need to divide the framework
>     contributors in smaller teams. Usually more hierarchy results in more
>     bureaucracy but they way it's going now is just not working. Have people to
>     be responsible for managing the website. Have people to be responsible to
>     managing questions on the forum and make sure that all the leads get the
>     correct information when needed. Have meetings between leads to discuss the
>     planning of things and make it all transparant. There is no secret in
>     managing ZF but
>     at least make it clear what is going one. Don't forget that companies
>     actually rely on this piece of software.
>      
>     I think I'll leave it to this for now since I could talk on and on about
>     this. The conclusion of this e-mail is that:
>     - I am not happy with the way the framework is managed right now. I know
>     everyone is doing their best but people only have so much time.
>     (delegate!!!)
>     - I want more feedback and quicker responses.
>     - I would like to see a more transparant communication style about the
>     framework.
>      
>     Please, please, please try to understand how I feel and share your feelings
>     as well.
>      
>     Kind regards,
>      
>     Walter Tamboer
>
>

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Anthony Shireman
In reply to this post by Derek Miranda
I'll throw in my thoughts and say that progress is going as well as it can. There's only so many people actively contributing to the framework right now. The big push is the core/basic/important functionality that makes up the backbone of ZF2. I would love to see a Zend_Math or Zend_Image component... but I'd like to see them worked on after the important bits are taken care of.

Could things be better? Always. But it takes time to get there. I'm happy to see the earlier email that beta 3 is delayed by a few days. The team set a high bar for themselves and delayed it because it wasn't up to their standards, or lacked a feature they thought was important, or whatever decision they made was for a good reason. I see lots of activity in IRC and on github and that seems to be where the team members are at.

I'm sure that Zend would love to hire more people to work on ZF, but it's difficult when the end product is something given away freely. I don't think a ZF fund would help, but maybe MWOP can start a Kickstarter project if funding would help. :) Mostly kidding.

I'm happy with how things are going, even if slow, I know it will be worth the wait.


Tony

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Derek Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:
Usually my email responses on this list never seem to be delivered (I get an auto reply saying my message was not acceptable) and I haven't bothered to respond in quite a while, but this prompted me to give it another shot. 

I have to say, I completely agree with Walter. Just this morning I wanted to find the latest on ZF2 and after bouncing around a bunch of different sites and resources, I came to the conclusion that there is no one place for all information, clear and concise. Maybe this resource does exist, but if it does, it hasn't been easy to find. 

As far as proposals go, I never bothered to write any because I ultimately felt, well, what's the point? I have watched with great anticipation the proposal for a Zend_Image component which people have been literally begging for, but the proposal has gone no where. How is it possible that something utilized so often as image manipulation in a Web 2.0 world has not found itself in a modern framework? This isn't a new proposal, it's been there for years. And, there was no clear indication as to wether the component would be approved or coded in days, weeks, years. When? I ended up writing my own. 

In short, way to go, Walter. Something has got to give.

On Feb 28, 2012, at 3:32 PM, Walter Tamboer wrote:

Hello everyone,
 
In this e-mail I would like to share my feelings about Zend Framework and its community. This e-mail will look like a rant but please remember that I have the best intentions.
 
A couple of years ago I started working with Zend Framework. Like many of you I loved its structure from the start. The fact that it doesn't force me to work in a certain
way like many other frameworks do feels liberated. I see ZF as a foundation layer for applications one could make. Every component within ZF serves its purpose in an abstract way.
 
Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of this framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am now focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is incredibly invisble. Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails where new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1 in May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about the quallity of a proposal which might attract responding to it or not. The point I am trying to make is that there is absolutely no feedback from the ZF team. The same goes for proposals made by other people. One thing I'd like to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I do not blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a lack of interest int their contributors. They AT LEAST should respond to a new proposal since a person is doing work for them.
 
I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a business. Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening here? They will quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That really makes me sad since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My working colleagues have the same feeling. Why propose something if you get no feedback from the decision makers anyway?
 
Ok. A lot of negativity here. Again, I do not want to make people look or feel bad so let's turn this e-mail into something positive. I know other people feel the same, I have had discussions in IRC channels before. I even think that the ZF team itself feels the same about this (how can they not?). So how do we find a solution for this (admitting it is a problem)?
 
First of all, one thing that I think of as a big problem is the accessibility of the framework. I think the mailing list is not inviting people to participate. I personally hate it since I am receiving tons of emails everyday. Archiving the mails and searching through them is even more a pain in the ass. There for I feel a forum is more suitable for a project like Zend Framework. It also makes it more accessible for people to ask questions (like zfforums). Oh and btw; don't come with a response that there is an archive on nabble. That is the most disgusting piece of software on the web ;-)
 
My next suggestion is to redesign the website. I would like to make a more central place for developers beside the wiki. I am thinking about:
- Voting on features to see what the interest of the community is;
- An "idea box" for people that would like to see new features but don't want to develop them;
- Team descriptions, who is responsible for what?
- A roadmap. What is the planning of everything? I don't want to see some very vaque roadmap from some issue tracker. No it should be readable.
 
This probably means that some things should be migrated from the wiki to the website it self but I believe that it will result in a more structured communication style.

I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is the lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to when you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported a bug about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.
 
So how do we get this done? I think we need to divide the framework contributors in smaller teams. Usually more hierarchy results in more bureaucracy but they way it's going now is just not working. Have people to be responsible for managing the website. Have people to be responsible to managing questions on the forum and make sure that all the leads get the correct information when needed. Have meetings between leads to discuss the planning of things and make it all transparant. There is no secret in managing ZF but
at least make it clear what is going one. Don't forget that companies actually rely on this piece of software.
 
I think I'll leave it to this for now since I could talk on and on about this. The conclusion of this e-mail is that:
- I am not happy with the way the framework is managed right now. I know everyone is doing their best but people only have so much time. (delegate!!!)
- I want more feedback and quicker responses.
- I would like to see a more transparant communication style about the framework.
 
Please, please, please try to understand how I feel and share your feelings as well.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

weierophinney
Administrator
In reply to this post by Walter Tamboer
-- Walter Tamboer <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Tuesday, 28 February 2012, 09:32 PM +0100):
> Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of
> this framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am
> now focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is
> incredibly invisble.

So, to start...  Can you give me some concrete ways myself, my team, and
the community review team can be more visible? Where on the site should
you expect to find this information? what kinds of contact details
should be present? Do you expect weekly communiques? I need some
concrete ideas from you and others who feel that we're not visible
enough -- because right now, I'm all over the place, and don't know what
more folks are expecting of me, my team, or the CR team.

> Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails where
> new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new
> proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1
> in May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a
> discussion about the quallity of a proposal which might attract
> responding to it or not. The point I am trying to make is that there
> is absolutely no feedback from the ZF team.

The current workflow is that the community review team reviews a
proposal and gives feedback until either the proposal is withdrawn or
accepted. My team is then asked to do one last review (typically an "is
it consistent" review), and then it's up to the author to get the code
done, and reviewed by the CR team for inclusion.

One problem has been we've been slow in coming up with a strategy for
ZF1 as we shifted gears to ZF2. This put the proposal process into a
tailspin that has meant it's been languishing. In the meantime, we've
moved to a more informal process for ZF2, using a more "RFC" style
approach. But you're right -- we need to document it and make it more
clear.

> The same goes for proposals made by other people. One thing I'd like
> to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I do not
> blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a
> lack of interest int their contributors.  They AT LEAST should respond
> to a new proposal since a person is doing work for them.

Actually... You're doing it for yourself, and to share your work with
others. ZF is an open source project, and people contribute because they
have an itch to scratch.

Yes, somebody from the CR team and/or my team should likely comment on
proposals. But part of that is identifying who has enough background
knowledge to do so. Part of that might be finding other community
members who have a need for the functionality you propose to review and
give feedback -- as that way, if nobody on the ZF or CR teams has the
expertise, they can ask others about the quality of the proposal.

Now, that said... reasonable expectations need to be had on both sides
of the proposal "fence". I know you proposed the Math component to ZF2
last week -- but right now, contributors are heads-down finishing and
reviewing code for beta3... and won't likely be able to review proposals
until it ships. So, in a situation like this, have patience, and push
for feedback when it's clear there's a lull in project activity.

> I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a
> business. Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening
> here? They will quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That
> really makes me sad since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My
> working colleagues have the same feeling.  Why propose something if
> you get no feedback from the decision makers anyway?

Knowing that OSS is primarily a volunteer effort (even if myself and my
team are paid to work full-time on it, we still have limited resources),
how do you propose resolving this?

Tools _may_ help, but I think this is more a matter of governance and
commitment by contributors and users.

 * Forums vs ML
   Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
   different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
   asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
   (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
   my mailbox, but I can adapt.)

 * Website
   The website needs some attention. Part of the problem right now is
   the site is built on top of code originally laid down in 2006, and
   organically updated over time. It's hard to maintain and deploy. It
   needs a rewrite.

   But more than that, it needs somebody with SEO/design expertise to
   make it easier to discover content on it. And that's hard in part
   because we have content spread not only over our site, but over many
   tools. This is not something that will happen overnight, particularly
   as we really need to focus on getting ZF2 stable.

 * Voting/idea box/team descriptions. I don't see why the wiki cannot
   be a good location for these things, to be honest. We've run a number
   of votes on the wiki using a custom plugin, and these have both gone
   over well, as well as served as good documentation of decisions. As
   for "idea box", we can setup an area of the wiki for people to post
   "ideas" and gather feedback. Once the ideas have momentum, of course,
   they either need a proposal or a story in the planning tool (more on
   that below).

 * Roadmap. We have one. I mentioned it on the list a couple weeks ago,
   and in a recent IRC meeting. http://framework.zend.com/zf2/board is a
   representation of our Kanban board, which we do via
   http://www.agilezen.com/ You can select specific tags to see
   features/fixes/etc. that are in progress and/or complete. Anybody can
   request an invite, and can simply ping me or anyone on the CR team if
   they want collaborator privileges (for creating stories and tasks and
   moving things around on the board).

Basically, there's a lot of work to be done, but we've made huge
progress in the last six months. The activity on GitHub and in the ML
shows a lot of collaboration and inflow of ideas, we actually _have_ a
public roadmap, we're meeting regularly as a community to discuss
development and direction, and more. Is there room for improvement? Yes.
Are things better than they've been in the past. Yes.

> I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is the
> lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to when
> you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported a bug
> about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
> Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.

My team:

 * Me (project lead)
 * Ralph Schindler (engineer)
 * Enrico Zimuel (engineer)

Community Review Team:

 * Rob Allen (Akrabat)
 * Padraic Brady (PadraicB)
 * Ryan Mauger (Bittarman)
 * Pieter Kokx (kokx)
 * Ben Scholzen (DASPRiD)
 * Shaun Farrel (farelly)

We need to likely have a place on the site for this. I've traditionally
not done this, as I want to emphasize contributions, not hierarchy (see
http://framework.zend.com/community/contributors). But if this will help
folks know where to turn when they have questions/concerns, then let's
do it.

I also think that your idea for having more fine-grained teams makes
sense -- my main problem is that, because this is an open source
project, people come and go, and it's often difficult to realize there's
a gap in responsibility. I'm also a big believer in self-organizing
teams -- and I've seen a good deal of that happening in #zftalk.2 on
Freenode.

Thanks for your feedback -- and I'd love to hear your suggestions to
some of the questions I raised in this reply.

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

EvanDotPro
In reply to this post by Walter Tamboer
Hi Walter,

There's a lot to respond to, but I just quickly wanted to say
something and comment on your idea about a new ZF site.

First, I think you may be overestimating the developer/contributor
resources we have available. Pretty much every *volunteer* contributor
I know has been sacrificing almost every moment of their free time
over the last several months to help get these beta releases out and
the core stuff out. As mentioned by Anthony, getting this core stuff
out for ZF2 has mostly taken priority over processing new proposals,
etc.

Second, regarding building a new ZF site... I'm with you on this. I
think the current site is dated, less helpful than it could be, and
the tooling (confluence/jira crap) is terrible. I'd love to see us
build a new, OPEN framework / community site with new tools that
better integrate with where the activity is. I'd love to see such a
site built on ZF2 and available as a great example of ZF2 on GitHub.
It's something that's been talked about, and the core team agrees it
would be great, but ultimately it comes down to time and resources. We
simply don't have it, nor do we have volunteers stepping up to offer
to take on such projects. A perfect example is
modules.zendframework.com. I've said from the beginning that I don't
have the time to manage the project, and Matthew was clear that Zend
doesn't have the manpower either, so it hangs in the hands of
contributors. I've donated the dedicated server / hosting for it,
Matthew even generously set us up the official subdomain, which is
awesome! I've been trying in my limited spare time to add things like
GitHub integration, but progress is slow when there's so much other
stuff to get done and the active contributors are so tied up trying to
get these releases out.

So sure, we can start a new ZF site -- but who is going to take on the
project? Who has the time to draw up a plan, see it through, and get
it launched? Ultimately, the contributors are focused on higher
priority things right now.

That said, I rarely see a question on the ML go unanswered. Matthew
has done an exceptional job, IMO at answering virtually every question
posted to any of the ZF mailing lists. Would a forum help? Maybe, who
knows. It's something we can look at down the road. Personally, I'd
prefer whatever solution we use still allow me to interface with it
via e-mail, as that approach is natural to me and matches how I
interact with other project. Stuff like that is personal preference
and for each person that wants a forum, I'm sure you'll find someone
like me who prefers e-mail as an interface.

--
Evan Coury
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Ben Scholzen 'DASPRiD'
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Andreas Möller
In reply to this post by EvanDotPro
> . . . but ultimately it comes down to time and resources. We
> simply don't have it, nor do we have volunteers stepping up to offer
> to take on such projects.

But that's not a cause, that's a result caused by a different problem.
And that's, in my opinion, what Walter criticises.


Andreas
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Alessandro Pellizzari
In reply to this post by weierophinney
Il Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:20:00 -0600, Matthew Weier O'Phinney ha scritto:

I will follow the discussion before commenting on the other points, but I
would like to say just a thing about this:

>  * Forums vs ML
>    Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
>    different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
>    asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
>    (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
>    my mailbox, but I can adapt.)

I hate forums. There is no way I will open a website every day (multiple
times per day) to see what's new. I will never search them to see what's
unread.

With a newsgroup or a mailing list I have all threaded and marked as
unread whenever I find 5 minutes to read it.

Stackoverflow is good for a question-quickanswer scenario, but is
absolutely inappropriate for a development discussion.

I know I am not contributing, but I use this mailing list to keep
informed about ZF, given I have about 80 sites based on it online.

Switching off the mailing list means I will not follow discussions, and
get to know of updates only by the way of some blog's rss feed.
And eventually switch to another framework.

Bye.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

maastermedia
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Walter Tamboer
Hello,

these are some very nice ideas for Zend Framework 2. Thank you for bringing this topic up.

I would also just point one particullar issue with Zend Framework 2 and I appologize in advance if this is already somewhere debated.

Currently ZF2 repository is on http://github.com/zendframework/zf2

Wouldn't be also a good idea to somehow refactor zf2 repository?

For instance to put zf2 also into some seperate repositories.

GitHub has this already figured out how to easily create a new repository from existing one. No submodules and no particullar maintaining is needed for this:
http://help.github.com/split-a-subpath-into-a-new-repo/

I would maybe put library folder in new repository so it can be cloned from github and used separately in different frameworks and applications.

Thank you and keep up the good work. Very nice framework.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

weierophinney
Administrator
In reply to this post by Alessandro Pellizzari
-- Alessandro Pellizzari <[hidden email]> wrote
(on Wednesday, 29 February 2012, 09:30 AM +0000):

> Il Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:20:00 -0600, Matthew Weier O'Phinney ha scritto:
> I will follow the discussion before commenting on the other points, but I
> would like to say just a thing about this:
>
> >  * Forums vs ML
> >    Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
> >    different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
> >    asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
> >    (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
> >    my mailbox, but I can adapt.)
>
> I hate forums. There is no way I will open a website every day (multiple
> times per day) to see what's new. I will never search them to see what's
> unread.
>
> With a newsgroup or a mailing list I have all threaded and marked as
> unread whenever I find 5 minutes to read it.
>
> Stackoverflow is good for a question-quickanswer scenario, but is
> absolutely inappropriate for a development discussion.

I would not consider SO for this list -- but as a replacement for lists
like fw-general, fw-mvc, etc., which are more support-oriented.
Development discussions should definitely be on an ML, not a forum.

> I know I am not contributing, but I use this mailing list to keep
> informed about ZF, given I have about 80 sites based on it online.
>
> Switching off the mailing list means I will not follow discussions, and
> get to know of updates only by the way of some blog's rss feed.
> And eventually switch to another framework.

--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney
Project Lead            | [hidden email]
Zend Framework          | http://framework.zend.com/
PGP key: http://framework.zend.com/zf-matthew-pgp-key.asc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

EvanDotPro
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:15 AM, Matthew Weier O'Phinney
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> -- Alessandro Pellizzari <[hidden email]> wrote
> (on Wednesday, 29 February 2012, 09:30 AM +0000):
>> Il Tue, 28 Feb 2012 16:20:00 -0600, Matthew Weier O'Phinney ha scritto:
>> I will follow the discussion before commenting on the other points, but I
>> would like to say just a thing about this:
>>
>> >  * Forums vs ML
>> >    Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
>> >    different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
>> >    asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
>> >    (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
>> >    my mailbox, but I can adapt.)
>>
>> I hate forums. There is no way I will open a website every day (multiple
>> times per day) to see what's new. I will never search them to see what's
>> unread.
>>
>> With a newsgroup or a mailing list I have all threaded and marked as
>> unread whenever I find 5 minutes to read it.
>>
>> Stackoverflow is good for a question-quickanswer scenario, but is
>> absolutely inappropriate for a development discussion.
>
> I would not consider SO for this list -- but as a replacement for lists
> like fw-general, fw-mvc, etc., which are more support-oriented.
> Development discussions should definitely be on an ML, not a forum.

Thank you, I'm glad to hear that.

--
Evan Coury
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Mike A
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
This post was updated on .
In reply to this post by Andreas Möller
Comments like Walter's will come from time to time in any organization displaying "loose edges". Zend Framework 2.0, being in R&D, inevitably has loose edges. Where to aim criticism for acceptable action though?

It's easy enough to say everyone's busy as blue-bummed flies in bringing Beta 3 to release. It's also easy to aim criticism in the direction of MWO-led "management". Maybe there's a different perspective?

To begin, dispel the myth that Zend Framework being open source does not grow Zend's financial resource. It does.

ZF2 will, obviously, garner income from certification course and exam fees. An existing base of certified ZF1 engineers will to some extent convert, and new certifications will come. Simple calculation, 1,000 certified ZF2 pro's at 1,000 bucks apiece brings in a million. Of course, $1,000 isn't the fee, but Zend wins.

ZF2 development and community discussion also provides technical and market intelligence. Industrial intelligence is expensive stuff. Zend saves a fortune from it's hive of willing devotees. That intelligence feeds into R&D, market planning and strategic positioning of other products. For example, put together a few modules and couple with ZendGuard, and hey presto, a swathe of income opportunities for the Zend Executive or investors on its board. [http://www.zend.com/en/products/] All compliments of highly skilled, qualified, competent developers who have given their free time.

Increase in valuation of Zend's worth to investors grows considerably too. ZF2, perhaps with Zend-made modules, could well add $50 million or more to a Zend buyout.

Against that background, how often do the ZF community hear from Zend's executives? [here]

Seriously, how often do Andi Gutmans and Zeev Suraski pop in and say hello, engage, or simply say thanks? They are benefiting from the freely given efforts and talents of brilliant people like Evan Coury. Evan, because of his polyphasic sleeping regime can devote more than 20 hours on some days, not much less on others. The list of his peers are long.

A small message in it's politest form to Andi and Zeev: the balance between your benefit from ZF2 development and it's community and your graciousness in acknowledging them is way off. Time to stop that shitty attitude. MWO and his band of friends and followers could go if a persuasive investment is provided for a new framework. Z'beginning?

Okay, a little tongue-in-cheek jockeying. Attitudes and progress are being monitored though, mostly in silence.

Do the Board want to show its worth, its strength of character? From a corporate strategy perspective, push $250,000 into MWO's department. In March. Provide him with another couple of serious players. As caretaker of the ZF community his attitude, ability and input is nothing short of brilliant. He will know what to do with the investment and bring home the best from it. That's his proven track record. The investment will come back from increased Zend Certification income. Or instead, is MWO's department the poor cousin in Zend operations? A department designed to gain financial advantage for free whilst the executive lord it? There's a cure for that, a cure giving MWO framework freedom and new investors a marvellous opportunity!

Returning to what Andreas replied to Walter: "But that's not a cause, that's a result caused by a different problem.
And that's, in my opinion, what Walter criticises."

Walter essentially criticises barriers to becoming involved. That's unsurprising given that Zend executives provide little visible support to MWO or the community. Why?

From an international politics perspective, it's too easy to aim the claim that Zend is an Israeli company with an all-take no-give mentality. Top brass need to watch out for that one, especially when relying on volunteers. Corporates in China, Russia and other countries think differently to States' folk as far as Israel's concerned, and are not blind. From a board perspective, MWO is not listed as an executive. Perhaps that short-sightedness will eventually lead to MWO going elsewhere - leading friends and community developers with him (a tragedy for Zend if it were to happen). And from a management perspective, perhaps MWO's team simply needs an extra person charged with managing the community. It's for Zend executives to ensure there are no barriers to the customer base (developers) becoming involved with their product. Frankly, as far as Zend Framework goes, Zend's marketing department appears inefficient if not inept as regards customer retention.

I agree with Andreas if he is suggesting that barriers to involvement are caused by a problem different from resources. It's a problem firmly belonging with the executive and their marketing department. Proof? I just looked: Symfony has 200 more compatriots on IRC than ZF2's 80.

FWIW, I think that Walter would be able to make the same criticism next year. Developers are developers - screw organisation, well-organised documentation, and detailed hand-holding for newbies. I think failing to respond to emails, even with a holding courtesy, will continue until MWO has an able administrative helper. And I think access to information via an all encompassing website will delay as the result of board executive dilly-dallying, especially by a marketing department desperately in need of a shake-up. Most of all I think the present position will remain until this particular open-source community is made free by giving MWO complete autonomy, an autonomy separate from any internal Zend policy-makers.

Shake-ups are good. They wake from slumber, invigorate, and protect unwitting victims. That's why I'm launching a magazine (an executive decision, no less!).

Systems have now been ordered. Software has arrived. Scamps and first articles are in. A search for staff is under way. It looks like late March for launch, although it could be April. There'll be a website, in time. Then, completely separate from Zend executives, the community can hopefully find what they need in one place. [Articles please! I shall open a separate thread when ready.]

Have no doubt that frameworks will merge their approaches within a year or so. That means I could deal with various PHP frameworks, the main ones having their own supplement. Or I could make it ZF2 specific in accord with original intention. To do that needs Zend's blessing. More than a week later, I have not received a reply from Zend to correspondence on the subject. After next Tuesday I shall go the frameworks route, leading to parity with ZF2 for other frameworks instead of it taking a clear lead.

I cannot deny being biased towards Zend Framework ATM. That does not mean this developer and corporate executive with over 40 years experience would shirk from criticising it's masters if needed and well founded. Developers want a good framework tool they can use to build systems. MWO has excelled at that. Zend haven't. A magazine may bridge that gap with helpful input and feedback. If not, another framework will bridge it.

Meantime, the frantic activity of MWO with a loyal band of contributors simply leaves me in awe. I would love to contribute to development and become part of it. I felt there was no adequate route to assist for my simple mind, a mind burdened by multiple things to do. A profit-orientated enterprise is not going to receive my valuable time and commitment, to their gain and my loss, if they make life anything but very easy for me. However, I can help with a publication condensing worldwide activity, feedback and interest into a central hub and conduit towards relevant resources.

Without drastic measures, this time next year I envisage a framework with multiple paths to documentation, wish lists, RPCs and so on: but with an additional burden for dozens of modules, most from outside Zend. How's that to be managed? O.o

Walter has some good points! Maybe frameworks like Symfony will gain because of good management and thus superior commercial credibility, not superior technology.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

EvanDotPro
In reply to this post by Andreas Möller
Hi all,

I am cross-posting a post by MikeA that didn't make it to the list and is stuck on Nabble.

See the original post here: http://zend-framework-community.634137.n4.nabble.com/The-future-of-Zend-Framework-tp4429472p4431756.html

 
Comments like Walter's will come from time to time in any organization displaying "loose edges". Zend Framework 2.0, being in R&D, inevitably has loose edges. Where to aim criticism for acceptable action though? 

It's easy enough to say everyone's busy as blue-bummed flies in bringing Beta 3 to release. It's also easy to aim criticism in the direction of MWO-led "management". Maybe there's a different perspective? 

To begin, dispel the myth that Zend Framework being open source does not grow Zend's financial resource. It does. 

ZF2 will, obviously, garner income from certification course and exam fees. An existing base of certified ZF1 engineers will to some extent convert, and new certifications will come. Simple calculation, 1,000 certified ZF2 pro's at 1,000 bucks apiece brings in a million. Of course, $1,000 isn't the fee, but Zend wins. 

ZF2 development and community discussion also provides technical and market intelligence. Industrial intelligence is expensive stuff. Zend saves a fortune from it's hive of willing devotees. That intelligence feeds into R&D, market planning and strategic positioning of other products. For example, put together a few modules and couple with ZendGuard, and hey presto, a swathe of income opportunities for the Zend Executive or investors on its board. [http://www.zend.com/en/products/] All compliments of highly skilled, qualified, competent developers who have given their free time. 

Increase in valuation of Zend's worth to investors grows considerably too. ZF2, perhaps with Zend-made modules, could well add $50 million or more to a Zend buyout. 

Against that background, how often do the ZF community hear from Zend's executives? [here] 

Seriously, how often do Andi Gutmans and Zeev Suraski pop in and say hello, engage, or simply say thanks? They are benefiting from the freely given efforts and talents of brilliant people like Evan Coury. Evan, because of his polyphasic sleeping regime can devote more than 20 hours on some days, not much less on others. The list of his peers are long. 

A small message in it's politest form to Andi and Zeev: the balance between your benefit from ZF2 development and it's community and your graciousness in acknowledging them is way off. Time to stop that shitty attitude. MWO and his band of friends and followers could go if a persuasive investment is provided for a new framework. Z'beginning? 

Okay, a little tongue-in-cheek jockeying. Attitudes and progress are being monitored though, mostly in silence. 

Do the Board want to show its worth, its strength of character? From a corporate strategy perspective, push $250,000 into MWO's department. In March. Provide him with another couple of serious players. As caretaker of the ZF community his attitude, ability and input is nothing short of brilliant. He will know what to do with the investment and bring home the best from it. That's his proven track record. The investment will come back from increased Zend Certification income. Or instead, is MWO's department the poor cousin in Zend operations? A department designed to gain financial advantage for free whilst the executive lord it? There's a cure for that, a cure giving MWO framework freedom and new investors a marvellous opportunity! 

Returning to what Andreas replied to Walter: "But that's not a cause, that's a result caused by a different problem. 
And that's, in my opinion, what Walter criticises." 

Walter essentially criticises barriers to becoming involved. That's unsurprising given that Zend executives provide little visible support to MWO or the community. Why? 

From an international politics perspective, it's too easy to aim the claim that Zend is an Israeli company with an all-take no-give mentality. Top brass need to watch out for that one, especially when relying on volunteers. Corporates in China, Russia and other countries think differently to States' folk as far as Israel's concerned, and are not blind. From a board perspective, MWO is not listed as an executive. Perhaps that short-sightedness will eventually lead to MWO going elsewhere - leading friends and community developers with him (a tragedy for Zend if it were to happen). And from a management perspective, perhaps MWO's team simply needs an extra person charged with managing the community. It's for Zend executives to ensure there are no barriers to the customer base (developers) becoming involved with their product. Frankly, as far as Zend Framework goes, Zend's marketing department appears inefficient if not inept as regards customer retention. 

I agree with Andreas if he is suggesting that barriers to involvement are caused by a problem different from resources. It's a problem firmly belonging with the executive and their marketing department. Proof? I just looked: Symfony has 200 more compatriots on IRC than ZF2's 80. 

FWIW, I think that Walter would be able to make the same criticism next year. Developers are developers - screw organisation, well-organised documentation, and detailed hand-holding for newbies. I think failing to respond to emails, even with a holding courtesy, will continue until MWO has an able administrative helper. And I think access to information via an all encompassing website will delay as the result of board executive dilly-dallying, especially by a marketing department desperately in need of a shake-up. Most of all I think the present position will remain until this particular open-source community is made free by giving MWO complete autonomy, an autonomy separate from any internal Zend policy-makers. 

Shake-ups are good. They wake from slumber, invigorate, and protect unwitting victims. That's why I'm launching a magazine (an executive decision, no less!). 

Systems have now been ordered. Software has arrived. Scamps and first articles are in. A search for staff is under way. It looks like late March for launch, although it could be April. There'll be a website, in time. Then, completely separate from Zend executives, the community can hopefully find what they need in one place. [Articles please! I shall open a separate thread when ready.] 

Have no doubt that frameworks will merge their approaches within a year or so. That means I could deal with various PHP frameworks, the main ones having their own supplement. Or I could make it ZF2 specific in accord with original intention. To do that needs Zend's blessing. More than a week later, I have not received a reply from Zend to correspondence on the subject. After next Tuesday I shall go the frameworks route, leading to parity with ZF2 for other frameworks instead of it taking a clear lead. 

I cannot deny being biased towards Zend Framework ATM. That does not mean this developer and corporate executive with over 40 years experience would shirk from criticising it's masters if needed and well founded. Developers want a good framework tool they can use to build systems. MWO has excelled at that. Zend haven't. A magazine may bridge that gap with helpful input and feedback. If not, another framework will bridge it. 

Meantime, the frantic activity of MWO with a loyal band of contributors simply leaves me in awe. I would love to contribute to development and become part of it. I felt there was no adequate route to assist for my simple mind, a mind burdened by multiple things to do. A profit-orientated enterprise is not going to receive my valuable time and commitment, to their gain and my loss, if they make life anything but very easy for me. However, I can help with a publication condensing worldwide activity, feedback and interest into a central hub and conduit towards relevant resources. 

Without drastic measures, this time next year I envisage a framework with multiple paths to documentation, wish lists, RPCs and so on: but with an additional burden for dozens of modules, most from outside Zend. How's that to be managed? O.o 

Walter has some good points! Maybe frameworks like Symfony will gain because of good management and thus superior commercial credibility, not superior technology. 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Adam Lundrigan
In reply to this post by Walter Tamboer
Walter, 

I understand where you are coming from.  I've kept a similar, less exasperating lament to myself, but I fear that you've now gone and triggered it. 

I've been contributing to ZFv1 (minor bug fixes, issue tracker cleanup and such) on and off for about a year...it's my humble way of paying back for what ZF has given me over the years.  And, to be honest, the process has been frustrating at times.  The difficulty in getting feedback isn't just limited to proposals and new code, but to bug fixes as well.  

As Bart McLeod says in this past month's phparch, "A bug is harmless until it hits you, so try to hit it first".  I'm a strong believer in that motto, and that's how I've been applying my contributions to ZFv1:  Find a bug in an area i've used, research a fix, implement, test and submit it.  Rinse.  Repeat.  The community is (hopefully) all the better for it, and I've learned something new.  But now for the lament:  much of my effort still lies stagnating in patch files in JIRA, waiting for someone (anyone?) to give feedback, try the patch, or even just to tell me i'm an idiot and my fix is stupid.  But, all there is is silence. 

After my last spurt of bug fixing in November, I had all but given up on doing any more contributing to ZFv1.  Back in Sept/Oct, it looked like there would be an upswing in activity as "A Rant From Mr. Grumpy on ZF2" in August got the ZF community all fired up again, and I hoped that a tiny portion of that newfound enthusiasm would spill back to ZFv1.  For a short moment, it looked like it might, but it didn't and my enthusiasm faded.  How many of my patches from that time that I didn't commit myself have been reviewed/tested/accepted/applied since then?  zero that I can find. 

Why?  Many reasons, but I would guess most of the component leads have moved on, or are no longer able to commit time, or just don't care anymore.  Those core contributors who remain are face-and-eyes into ZF2 and don't have time to do both.  ZFv1 is getting long-in-the-tooth, and with ZF2 on the horizon it's hard to justify investing major time into working on it...kind of like polishing the deck of the Titanic while it's inevitably racing towards that iceberg.

It all comes back to one common thread amongst all open source projects:  they're built on volunteer time, and that volunteer landscape is always shifting.  We can't force people to give feedback on our patches (or proposals), or keep maintaining their components after they've contributed them, or even reply to issue tickets for their components.  Life happens, and the stuff you do for free and/or for pleasure are usually the first to get dropped when it does.  I get that this is inevitable and no one's fault, but I think there should be a mechanism by which the framework can respond to this change and at least make an attempt to find new maintainers when existing ones need/want to drop the ball. 


In reading back over my above wordvomit, I fear it could be misread as a criticism of the project leadership.  It's not.  Matthew and his team are doing their very best (and more) with the limited resources Zend gives them to push the framework forward, and the result coming out of their (and other ZF2 contributors) hard work is second to none.  However, those of us still firmly entrenched in ZFv1 for the foreseeable future are left in the lurch, as all their resources are being dedicated to ZF2.  At my workplace i'm 18 months into a ~36 month transition from a custom-built PHP4 portal to one based on Zend Framework 1, and it's just a little disconcerting to see how little maintenance has been put into ZFv1 over the past 6 months or so, knowing that our entire operation will rest on it.  I know that there will be a ZF v1.12 and official support for at least the next two years, but it's still effectively a sinking ship. 

If it's not the fault of Matthew, et al then who's is it?  Secondarily, it's Zend for not providing more resources to the ZF team, but that blame only carries weight so far with me.  Primarily, the problem is the community at large.  This is where I think the community really needs to step up.  We use ZFv1, and derive great benefit from it, but how many of us give back? Judging by the recent SVN log and issue tracker history, practically none.  ZF is not end-user software...it's used by skilled technical people who know how to write code.  There is no reason nearly every single ZF user can't do something to give back.  Yes, I know there are other ways to give back (#zftalk, responding to ML and stackoverflow questions, etc), but still the ZFv1 contribution community feels like it needs to be on life support.  I think that now is the time for EVERY user of ZFv1 to step up and do something to help Matthew and his team out....reproduce a bug report, find+link+close duplicate issues, fill a documentation gap, offer to help moderate documentation comments (I understand they will be switched to Disqus soon)....ANYTHING, no matter how trivial, helps.  Many hands make light work ;)  


Sorry for going all Mr. Grumpy, there....blame Walter for setting me off ;)

--
Adam Lundrigan, B.Sc, ZCE
[hidden email]


On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Walter Tamboer <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello everyone,
 
In this e-mail I would like to share my feelings about Zend Framework and its community. This e-mail will look like a rant but please remember that I have the best intentions.
 
A couple of years ago I started working with Zend Framework. Like many of you I loved its structure from the start. The fact that it doesn't force me to work in a certain
way like many other frameworks do feels liberated. I see ZF as a foundation layer for applications one could make. Every component within ZF serves its purpose in an abstract way.
 
Lately I have been trying to get more involved in the development of this framework. I made some suggestions for components in ZF1 and I am now focussing on ZF2. What botters me is that the team behind ZF is incredibly invisble. Yes, of course there are IRC meetings and yes, I do see e-mails where new announcements are made. But there is almost zero response to new proposals. For example, I made a proposal for a Math component in ZF1 in May 2011 which got 4 replies. Now I don't want to get into a discussion about the quallity of a proposal which might attract responding to it or not. The point I am trying to make is that there is absolutely no feedback from the ZF team. The same goes for proposals made by other people. One thing I'd like to stress is that I understand that people don't respond. I do not blame anyone for not responding but I am blaming the ZF team for a lack of interest int their contributors. They AT LEAST should respond to a new proposal since a person is doing work for them.
 
I'd like to compare running an open source project with running a business. Can you imagine ignoring your employess like is happening here? They will quit. I feel the same about contributing too. That really makes me sad since I think I personally have a lot to offer. My working colleagues have the same feeling. Why propose something if you get no feedback from the decision makers anyway?
 
Ok. A lot of negativity here. Again, I do not want to make people look or feel bad so let's turn this e-mail into something positive. I know other people feel the same, I have had discussions in IRC channels before. I even think that the ZF team itself feels the same about this (how can they not?). So how do we find a solution for this (admitting it is a problem)?
 
First of all, one thing that I think of as a big problem is the accessibility of the framework. I think the mailing list is not inviting people to participate. I personally hate it since I am receiving tons of emails everyday. Archiving the mails and searching through them is even more a pain in the ass. There for I feel a forum is more suitable for a project like Zend Framework. It also makes it more accessible for people to ask questions (like zfforums). Oh and btw; don't come with a response that there is an archive on nabble. That is the most disgusting piece of software on the web ;-)
 
My next suggestion is to redesign the website. I would like to make a more central place for developers beside the wiki. I am thinking about:
- Voting on features to see what the interest of the community is;
- An "idea box" for people that would like to see new features but don't want to develop them;
- Team descriptions, who is responsible for what?
- A roadmap. What is the planning of everything? I don't want to see some very vaque roadmap from some issue tracker. No it should be readable.
 
This probably means that some things should be migrated from the wiki to the website it self but I believe that it will result in a more structured communication style.

I also think that the hierarchy within ZF should be made more clear. Who is the lead developer of the project and of each component? Who do you turn to when you have questions about a component or when you have bugs (I reported a bug about the SOAP component ages ago. Nothing happened with it).
Cleaning up old proposals (or at least managing it more) is a big plus too.
 
So how do we get this done? I think we need to divide the framework contributors in smaller teams. Usually more hierarchy results in more bureaucracy but they way it's going now is just not working. Have people to be responsible for managing the website. Have people to be responsible to managing questions on the forum and make sure that all the leads get the correct information when needed. Have meetings between leads to discuss the planning of things and make it all transparant. There is no secret in managing ZF but
at least make it clear what is going one. Don't forget that companies actually rely on this piece of software.
 
I think I'll leave it to this for now since I could talk on and on about this. The conclusion of this e-mail is that:
- I am not happy with the way the framework is managed right now. I know everyone is doing their best but people only have so much time. (delegate!!!)
- I want more feedback and quicker responses.
- I would like to see a more transparant communication style about the framework.
 
Please, please, please try to understand how I feel and share your feelings as well.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: The future of Zend Framework

Walter Tamboer
Hi guys,
 
First of all I would like to thank everybody that has responded so far. I'm glad and sad at the same time to see that I'm not the only one that find it difficult to deal with this situation. I also would like to say that I respect the work the core team is doing. Matthew, your efforts are much, much, much appreciated and I do know that you are doing whatever you can. The quality of the framework's code would not be what it is without you.
 
A lot has been set so I will try to respond to everybody's comments in this e-mail.
 
First off, Matthew.
 
> So, to start... Can you give me some concrete ways myself, my team, and
> the community review team can be more visible? Where on the site should
> you expect to find this information? what kinds of contact details
> should be present? Do you expect weekly communiques? I need some
> concrete ideas from you and others who feel that we're not visible
> enough -- because right now, I'm all over the place, and don't know what
> more folks are expecting of me, my team, or the CR team.
 
I know you are doing all you can and I appreciate that. I'm just saying that you are human as well. Maybe you just can't keep up and you need more manpower? Maybe instead of trying to be everywhere, you should centralize your work and let people come to you. Maybe communicating what you are doing would make things more clear. Not responding to propoals that are months and months old makes you invisible. Period.
 
Basically I want to see something like this:
March 5th 2012 - Team member 1 will review proposal A and provide the proposer with feedback.
March 5th 2012 - Team member 2 will review proposal B and provide the proposer with feedback.
March 6th 2012 - 1/2 day of issue patching in the order of which they are provided and 1/2 day planned of producing
March 7th 2012 - Full day of producing code.
This way people at least know when it's their turn to get feedback. I guess that planning this weekly does not take that long.
 
I am not trying to be harsh, I am not trying to blame anyone but let us at least be honest with each other and face it. It is no excuse to say that there is not enough time. You need to make time for things like this. That is also the reason that I suggested to introduce smaller teams. If that is not an option than I'd rather see you plan out your development work over a longer period of time. Say developing the MVC component takes a week, I'd rather see you taking two weeks so you have more time for other tasks such as managing the community. Maybe that avoids having people to feel left out.
 
About the website. I would love to start a discussion about it. I think it needs a complete redesign in order to get more information on it. How it would look like would of course be a different discussion. Maybe it is an idea to create an RFC for this and continue talking about ideas there.
 
> Actually... You're doing it for yourself, and to share your work with
> others. ZF is an open source project, and people contribute because they
> have an itch to scratch.
 
I agree and disagree with you at the same time. The fact that people are contributing is an act of giving and taking. I profit of bug fixes from people like people profit of bug fixes from me. That does not change anything to the fact that my contributions should be approved by your team.
 

> Yes, somebody from the CR team and/or my team should likely comment on
> proposals. But part of that is identifying who has enough background
> knowledge to do so. Part of that might be finding other community
> members who have a need for the functionality you propose to review and
> give feedback -- as that way, if nobody on the ZF or CR teams has the
> expertise, they can ask others about the quality of the proposal.
>
> Now, that said... reasonable expectations need to be had on both sides
> of the proposal "fence". I know you proposed the Math component to ZF2
> last week -- but right now, contributors are heads-down finishing and
> reviewing code for beta3... and won't likely be able to review proposals
> until it ships. So, in a situation like this, have patience, and push
> for feedback when it's clear there's a lull in project activity.
 
A perfect example of a lack of communication. I did not know at all that you guys are THAT busy. I'm sorry but I cannot be in the IRC channel 24/7 and I just don't have the time to read every e-mail from the mailing list I get. Like I said before, you cannot expect people to be patient for months.
 
> Knowing that OSS is primarily a volunteer effort (even if myself and my
> team are paid to work full-time on it, we still have limited resources),
> how do you propose resolving this?
 
Divide your time. If you give people the option to work on the framework, reckon their efforts. Either that or start dictating and decide what you guys think is best for the framework. There is nothing wrong with that option btw. In the end it comes down to having a stable codebase that companies can rely on. One thing I'm wondering is how much of development work you do your self. What do you think your producing/managing ratio is?
 
> * Forums vs ML
> Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
> different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
> asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
> (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
> my mailbox, but I can adapt.)
 
I love the idea of SO. As long as it is clear that SO is the _official_ forum to ask your questions on. How do you feel about a forum that acts as a mailing list as well? Forums vs ML is a religious discussion and everyone prefers something else. I wonder if there is software that makes both sides happy.
 

> * Website
> The website needs some attention. Part of the problem right now is
> the site is built on top of code originally laid down in 2006, and
> organically updated over time. It's hard to maintain and deploy. It
> needs a rewrite.
>
> But more than that, it needs somebody with SEO/design expertise to
> make it easier to discover content on it. And that's hard in part
> because we have content spread not only over our site, but over many
> tools. This is not something that will happen overnight, particularly
> as we really need to focus on getting ZF2 stable.
 
I hate the fact that content is spread out that much. Rob Allen has a tutorial on his own website, there are some blogs here and there, than there is the wiki, there is the official reference and than there is the mailing list with an archive on n*bble (yes it is a swearing word). The keyword here is "centralizing". I would love to take this job on me and I know that Evan Coury has interest in this as well. I would like to see this worked out into a functional design first before we start.
 
> * Voting/idea box/team descriptions
> ...

That is an option as well. My believe is that Wiki often are cluttered, unmaintained and not clear. I'd rather have a dashboard kind of application (web 2.0) style... Maybe I'm dreaming too much or I'm just spoiled. Either way I'd rather have these ideas integrated in a new website.
 
> * Roadmap. We have one. I mentioned it on the list a couple weeks ago,
> and in a recent IRC meeting. http://framework.zend.com/zf2/board is a
> representation of our Kanban board, which we do via
> http://www.agilezen.com/ You can select specific tags to see
> features/fixes/etc. that are in progress and/or complete. Anybody can
> request an invite, and can simply ping me or anyone on the CR team if
> they want collaborator privileges (for creating stories and tasks and
> moving things around on the board).
 
Just integrate this into the website. I don't have the time to figure out what is going on in Kanban. I need to manage my own work. Just give me an overview with the current status in plain english (comes down to communication again). Am I acting spoiled now? Probably.
 
> Basically, there's a lot of work to be done, but we've made huge
> progress in the last six months. The activity on GitHub and in the ML
> shows a lot of collaboration and inflow of ideas, we actually _have_ a
> public roadmap, we're meeting regularly as a community to discuss
> development and direction, and more. Is there room for improvement? Yes.
> Are things better than they've been in the past. Yes.
 
And I appreciate that. Nothing more than respect for you guys.
 
Alright. Next one is Evan Coury. Thank you for your feedback. Let me be short. Are you willing to work on an RFC with me to get all ideas on the table?
 
I'll ignore Ben with his Nabble comment. ;-)
 
Mike: Thank you for you feedback. What you are saying sounds very logical. Of course Zend is making money by the work we are doing. I personally don't care that they do. I am gaining too by all the work people are doing. To be honest I am not sure how I should respond to the points you raise.
 
Last but not least Adam. I fully agree with your call for more people to help out. But this is only possible when the foundation is there.
 
Ok, it took me two hours to read all the e-mails and write this response. I think I now know how you feel Matthew. It's hard work leading an open source project.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Derek Miranda
I agree with Walter. I am an experienced developer with decades of experience across many languages and as such have a lot to offer to the framework. Several times I wanted to get involved but found the information and processes so fragmented that I gave up. I know this is vague and Matthews immediate question will be the analytic who, what, how and why.  So tomorrow I will review those processes again and reply with where I feel the points of failure are and suggest ways to fix it. 

In closing though, I'd like to take moment to thank all the current contributors. They have done a fabulous job getting the framework to this point. And everyone is learning something new along the way. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 29, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Walter Tamboer <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi guys,
 
First of all I would like to thank everybody that has responded so far. I'm glad and sad at the same time to see that I'm not the only one that find it difficult to deal with this situation. I also would like to say that I respect the work the core team is doing. Matthew, your efforts are much, much, much appreciated and I do know that you are doing whatever you can. The quality of the framework's code would not be what it is without you.
 
A lot has been set so I will try to respond to everybody's comments in this e-mail.
 
First off, Matthew.
 
> So, to start... Can you give me some concrete ways myself, my team, and
> the community review team can be more visible? Where on the site should
> you expect to find this information? what kinds of contact details
> should be present? Do you expect weekly communiques? I need some
> concrete ideas from you and others who feel that we're not visible
> enough -- because right now, I'm all over the place, and don't know what
> more folks are expecting of me, my team, or the CR team.
 
I know you are doing all you can and I appreciate that. I'm just saying that you are human as well. Maybe you just can't keep up and you need more manpower? Maybe instead of trying to be everywhere, you should centralize your work and let people come to you. Maybe communicating what you are doing would make things more clear. Not responding to propoals that are months and months old makes you invisible. Period.
 
Basically I want to see something like this:
March 5th 2012 - Team member 1 will review proposal A and provide the proposer with feedback.
March 5th 2012 - Team member 2 will review proposal B and provide the proposer with feedback.
March 6th 2012 - 1/2 day of issue patching in the order of which they are provided and 1/2 day planned of producing
March 7th 2012 - Full day of producing code.
This way people at least know when it's their turn to get feedback. I guess that planning this weekly does not take that long.
 
I am not trying to be harsh, I am not trying to blame anyone but let us at least be honest with each other and face it. It is no excuse to say that there is not enough time. You need to make time for things like this. That is also the reason that I suggested to introduce smaller teams. If that is not an option than I'd rather see you plan out your development work over a longer period of time. Say developing the MVC component takes a week, I'd rather see you taking two weeks so you have more time for other tasks such as managing the community. Maybe that avoids having people to feel left out.
 
About the website. I would love to start a discussion about it. I think it needs a complete redesign in order to get more information on it. How it would look like would of course be a different discussion. Maybe it is an idea to create an RFC for this and continue talking about ideas there.
 
> Actually... You're doing it for yourself, and to share your work with
> others. ZF is an open source project, and people contribute because they
> have an itch to scratch.
 
I agree and disagree with you at the same time. The fact that people are contributing is an act of giving and taking. I profit of bug fixes from people like people profit of bug fixes from me. That does not change anything to the fact that my contributions should be approved by your team.
 

> Yes, somebody from the CR team and/or my team should likely comment on
> proposals. But part of that is identifying who has enough background
> knowledge to do so. Part of that might be finding other community
> members who have a need for the functionality you propose to review and
> give feedback -- as that way, if nobody on the ZF or CR teams has the
> expertise, they can ask others about the quality of the proposal.
>
> Now, that said... reasonable expectations need to be had on both sides
> of the proposal "fence". I know you proposed the Math component to ZF2
> last week -- but right now, contributors are heads-down finishing and
> reviewing code for beta3... and won't likely be able to review proposals
> until it ships. So, in a situation like this, have patience, and push
> for feedback when it's clear there's a lull in project activity.
 
A perfect example of a lack of communication. I did not know at all that you guys are THAT busy. I'm sorry but I cannot be in the IRC channel 24/7 and I just don't have the time to read every e-mail from the mailing list I get. Like I said before, you cannot expect people to be patient for months.
 
> Knowing that OSS is primarily a volunteer effort (even if myself and my
> team are paid to work full-time on it, we still have limited resources),
> how do you propose resolving this?
 
Divide your time. If you give people the option to work on the framework, reckon their efforts. Either that or start dictating and decide what you guys think is best for the framework. There is nothing wrong with that option btw. In the end it comes down to having a stable codebase that companies can rely on. One thing I'm wondering is how much of development work you do your self. What do you think your producing/managing ratio is?
 
> * Forums vs ML
> Actually, this is not a bad idea, but I'd take it a step in a
> different direction. I've seen a lot of movement to StackOverflow for
> asking ZF questions. Perhaps we should have a branded subsite there.
> (Personally, I'm not a fan of forums, as I'd prefer to have stuff in
> my mailbox, but I can adapt.)
 
I love the idea of SO. As long as it is clear that SO is the _official_ forum to ask your questions on. How do you feel about a forum that acts as a mailing list as well? Forums vs ML is a religious discussion and everyone prefers something else. I wonder if there is software that makes both sides happy.
 

> * Website
> The website needs some attention. Part of the problem right now is
> the site is built on top of code originally laid down in 2006, and
> organically updated over time. It's hard to maintain and deploy. It
> needs a rewrite.
>
> But more than that, it needs somebody with SEO/design expertise to
> make it easier to discover content on it. And that's hard in part
> because we have content spread not only over our site, but over many
> tools. This is not something that will happen overnight, particularly
> as we really need to focus on getting ZF2 stable.
 
I hate the fact that content is spread out that much. Rob Allen has a tutorial on his own website, there are some blogs here and there, than there is the wiki, there is the official reference and than there is the mailing list with an archive on n*bble (yes it is a swearing word). The keyword here is "centralizing". I would love to take this job on me and I know that Evan Coury has interest in this as well. I would like to see this worked out into a functional design first before we start.
 
> * Voting/idea box/team descriptions
> ...

That is an option as well. My believe is that Wiki often are cluttered, unmaintained and not clear. I'd rather have a dashboard kind of application (web 2.0) style... Maybe I'm dreaming too much or I'm just spoiled. Either way I'd rather have these ideas integrated in a new website.
 
> * Roadmap. We have one. I mentioned it on the list a couple weeks ago,
> and in a recent IRC meeting. http://framework.zend.com/zf2/board is a
> representation of our Kanban board, which we do via
> http://www.agilezen.com/ You can select specific tags to see
> features/fixes/etc. that are in progress and/or complete. Anybody can
> request an invite, and can simply ping me or anyone on the CR team if
> they want collaborator privileges (for creating stories and tasks and
> moving things around on the board).
 
Just integrate this into the website. I don't have the time to figure out what is going on in Kanban. I need to manage my own work. Just give me an overview with the current status in plain english (comes down to communication again). Am I acting spoiled now? Probably.
 
> Basically, there's a lot of work to be done, but we've made huge
> progress in the last six months. The activity on GitHub and in the ML
> shows a lot of collaboration and inflow of ideas, we actually _have_ a
> public roadmap, we're meeting regularly as a community to discuss
> development and direction, and more. Is there room for improvement? Yes.
> Are things better than they've been in the past. Yes.
 
And I appreciate that. Nothing more than respect for you guys.
 
Alright. Next one is Evan Coury. Thank you for your feedback. Let me be short. Are you willing to work on an RFC with me to get all ideas on the table?
 
I'll ignore Ben with his Nabble comment. ;-)
 
Mike: Thank you for you feedback. What you are saying sounds very logical. Of course Zend is making money by the work we are doing. I personally don't care that they do. I am gaining too by all the work people are doing. To be honest I am not sure how I should respond to the points you raise.
 
Last but not least Adam. I fully agree with your call for more people to help out. But this is only possible when the foundation is there.
 
Ok, it took me two hours to read all the e-mails and write this response. I think I now know how you feel Matthew. It's hard work leading an open source project.
 
Kind regards,
 
Walter Tamboer
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Alessandro Pellizzari
In reply to this post by Adam Lundrigan
Il Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:13:41 -0330, Adam Lundrigan ha scritto:

> After my last spurt of bug fixing in November, I had all but given up on
> doing any more contributing to ZFv1.  Back in Sept/Oct, it looked like
> there would be an upswing in activity as "A Rant From Mr. Grumpy on ZF2"
> in August got the ZF community all fired up again, and I hoped that a
> tiny portion of that newfound enthusiasm would spill back to ZFv1.  For
> a short moment, it looked like it might, but it didn't and my enthusiasm
> faded.
>  How many of my patches from that time that I didn't commit myself have
> been reviewed/tested/accepted/applied since then?  zero that I can find.
>
> Why?  Many reasons, but I would guess most of the component leads have
> moved on, or are no longer able to commit time, or just don't care
> anymore.
>  Those core contributors who remain are face-and-eyes into ZF2 and don't
> have time to do both.  ZFv1 is getting long-in-the-tooth, and with ZF2
> on the horizon it's hard to justify investing major time into working on
> it...kind of like polishing the deck of the Titanic while it's
> inevitably racing towards that iceberg.

I can feel your pain.

I think many people have a lot of projects based on ZF1 and would like to
be reassured on its future.
We will not be able to convert all our sites to ZF2 overnight.

I also understand that the core developers need to focus on ZF2, and it
is difficult to keep working on two projects this size.

My humble proposal (if it is possible) is to change ZF1 contribution
methodology, move it to github, and ask for volunteers in the community
to approve submitted patches, making it a full-community project.

I think ZF2 will not be ready for production for at least another 6
months, and it will take at least another 2-3 years to convert the
already deployed sites to a new version.
ZF1 still misses important components like OAuth2 (ZF-9747).

I think a more fexible contribution model could help.

Bye.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Artur Bodera
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Alessandro Pellizzari <[hidden email]> wrote:
My humble proposal (if it is possible) is to change ZF1 contribution
methodology, move it to github, and ask for volunteers in the community
to approve submitted patches, making it a full-community project.

ZF1 on GH... It seems like a great idea.... but it's not that easy.

Below are reasons Matthew brought up on this topic:

Matthew Weier O'Phinney <[hidden email]> wrote: 
Several reasons. 

 * Many, many developers pin svn:externals against ZF1's repository. 
 
 * The CLA enforcement required that we run our own git server, and have
  GH mirror it. The process for merging PR's was then more difficult,
  as we had to (a) determine if the person had a signed CLA (not always
  easy, as the email and username on github did not always match what
  we have in Crowd), (b) commit all changes to the master repository,
  and then (c) manually close the PR. This led to a disconnect; the PR
  would be closed, but GH would not update for anywhere up to a day
  following. This basically invalidates items 1-3.
 
 * Which then makes your point 6 moot -- we trade svn for git on the ZF
  servers, and also end up having to likely have an API and/or tool for
  checking CLA status of individuals. 
 
 * It also kind of makes (4) moot as well -- a lot of folks thought that
  ZF2 being on GH was pointless as long as we had the CLA in effect. 
 
 * Finally, it means retraining all the ZF1 contributors who are not
  contributing to ZF2 to use git and GH. And when you consider the
  number of translators involved, this is not a trivial undertaking.
 
Getting rid of the CLA for ZF1 is not going to happen; the reason is
that we really should retain the same licensing/contribution
requirements for a major branch.
I'd definitely love to move ZF1 to git and GH, but I also recognize and
appreciate all the arguments I made above. I don't think it will have as
much benefit to the project as it appears at first blush.
 

A.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The future of Zend Framework

Andreas Möller
In reply to this post by Alessandro Pellizzari
> My humble proposal (if it is possible) is to change ZF1 contribution
> methodology, move it to github, and ask for volunteers in the community
> to approve submitted patches, making it a full-community project.

If this was possible, it would be awesome.

I could instantly add ZF1 as a Git submodule without any pain, and I'd start contributing right away. I signed the contributor's licence agreement around two years ago, but I never got to actually contribute, because the whole process felt like a PITA.


Best regards,

Andreas
12