[Zope-CMF] Sneak preview - workflow

[Chris Withers]

*sheepish grinz*

As before, Seb comes up with a more measured and ultimately sensible response...

seb bacon wrote:
> 
> DC should do whatever they need to do to keep profitable.  If this
> means closing off some of the CMF code, then so be it.  I wouldn't
> want DC to struggle because of the Open Source decision, and I'm
> immensely grateful for what we've already been given.

I'd agree, although I would feel slightly cheated in this particular instance as
I know a lot of people spent a fair bit of time helping out in the mailing list
discussion. I'm sure that was done with the understanding that the results of
the discussion would be open sourced...

> 
> 1) DC committed themselves to OSS for a very good reason - essentially
>    the ones you outlined above.  DC opened up the previously closed
>    software, ZEO, for the same reasons.  

Interesting how both you and Shane used this point for opposite reasons...

>    Either those reasons still
>    stand and the original business model (consulting, etc) remains
>    sound, or the OSS experiment was a mistake.
> 
> 2) However, if DC sees add-on modules as part of consulting work, that
>    makes sense.
>    Isn't Workflow part of the core, though?  It is core features like
>    this which will encourage new users to embrace the CMF and help
>    develop it further, make it more stable, popular, and feature-rich,
>    and ultimately help DC sell 'modules'.
> 

> be (although I'd be very sad to see your latest work get closed off,
> and personally, I think it would be a mistake).

Me too :-S

> However, I'm a bit confused: could you explain how this is a new
> direction? In particular, what are the business requirements driving
> the recent flurry of CMF improvements?

I'd be very interested in these too...

One final comment though, if it appears that DC are 'cherry-picking' the best
ideas after discussing them with the community and then closed-sourcing the
results, the might discourage the community from getting involved in those
discussions.

It may also, in the extreme, raise the wrath of the FSF fundamentalists, which
would be unpleasant for all of us...

cheers,

Chris