google just pwned the brochureware site industry
http://pages.google.com Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit. layouts / skins -- Adrian Rossouw Drupal developer and Bryght Guy http://drupal.org | http://bryght.com
On 2/23/06, Adrian Rossouw <adrian@bryght.com> wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
Of particular note, the image and file management is dead simple. Image placement is rather clunky but I expect the behavior would improve.
On 23 Feb 2006, at 07:01, Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
I suspect that a _LOT_ of people will come to Drupal after having used Google Pages (i.e. when the outgrew Google looking for something more). With that in mind, it might make sense to adopt some of Google's terminology (if any), to aim for similar workflow and interaction design, etc. I might make the Drupal learning curve less steep as they recognize a thing or two. -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
Op donderdag 23 februari 2006 07:01, schreef Adrian Rossouw:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
layouts / skins
Themes are but a smal part of the whole "simplicity". Also, the google stuff is cool, but still geek. I know for a fact that a vast mayority of the brochureware owners are not at all interested in clicking around to get colours and stuff up. drupal + views + usability improvmets - loads of theme settings - a lot of core modules + a savvy consultant + a theme scaffold = perfect brochureware. At least, that is what we aim at with Sympal :) Bèr -- [ End user Drupal services and hosting | Sympal.nl ]
Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
layouts / skins
by site editor, do you mean the part link for 'change look'? and isn't our current theme system all about layouts/skins? what do you mean exactly? layout=chameleon, skin=marvin this google tool is impressive as far as user experience goes. but really, anyone who wants a site like this has far simpler tools to employ than drupal? when google decides to offer a CMS, then we are in for a fight. according to some rumors, this is forthcoming ...
This has been in the back of my mind for a couple of months. What's to stop Google from hosting their own Drupal-like community software? It's inevetible in my opinion. Maybe not this year or next, but certainly within a decade. On 2/23/06, Moshe Weitzman <weitzman@tejasa.com> wrote:
Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
layouts / skins
by site editor, do you mean the part link for 'change look'?
and isn't our current theme system all about layouts/skins? what do you mean exactly? layout=chameleon, skin=marvin
this google tool is impressive as far as user experience goes. but really, anyone who wants a site like this has far simpler tools to employ than drupal? when google decides to offer a CMS, then we are in for a fight. according to some rumors, this is forthcoming ...
-- Dondley Communications http://www.dondleycommunications.com Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet http://www.communicateordie.com
This has been in the back of my mind for a couple of months: What's to stop Google from hosting their own Drupal-like community software? It's inevetible in my opinion. Maybe not this year or next, but fairly soon. On 2/23/06, Steve Dondley <sdondley@gmail.com> wrote:
This has been in the back of my mind for a couple of months. What's to stop Google from hosting their own Drupal-like community software? It's inevetible in my opinion. Maybe not this year or next, but certainly within a decade.
On 2/23/06, Moshe Weitzman <weitzman@tejasa.com> wrote:
Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
layouts / skins
by site editor, do you mean the part link for 'change look'?
and isn't our current theme system all about layouts/skins? what do you mean exactly? layout=chameleon, skin=marvin
this google tool is impressive as far as user experience goes. but really, anyone who wants a site like this has far simpler tools to employ than drupal? when google decides to offer a CMS, then we are in for a fight. according to some rumors, this is forthcoming ...
-- Dondley Communications http://www.dondleycommunications.com
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet http://www.communicateordie.com
-- Dondley Communications http://www.dondleycommunications.com Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet http://www.communicateordie.com
This is a potential problem for places like Bryght, but I don't see Google really competing with mambo/joomla/xoops/drupal/phpnuke. I'm willing to bet that a Google CMS will be much better than a Drupal configuration that duplicates its precise functionality. Whether Google CMS will be able to adapt itself to match all the possible configurations of Drupal is a separate question entirely. What are the chances that this hypothetical google CMS will allow third-party plugins/modules to be run on the google servers? Slim to none, I'm betting. --Jeff
-----Original Message----- From: Steve Dondley [mailto:sdondley@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2006 10:47 AM To: development@drupal.org Subject: Re: [development] google just pwned the brochureware site industry
This has been in the back of my mind for a couple of months. What's to stop Google from hosting their own Drupal-like community software? It's inevetible in my opinion. Maybe not this year or next, but certainly within a decade.
Wouldn't that be Blogger? On 2/23/06, Jeff Eaton <jeff@viapositiva.net> wrote:
I'm willing to bet that a Google CMS will be much better than a Drupal configuration that duplicates its precise functionality.
*NEWSFLASH* Google buys Drupal and renames it Goopal. In complete unrelated news, Dries Buytaert was seen driving a new Ferrari through the streets of Antwerp. On 23 Feb 2006, at 8:23 PM, Earl Dunovant wrote:
Wouldn't that be Blogger?
On 2/23/06, Jeff Eaton <jeff@viapositiva.net> wrote: I'm willing to bet that a Google CMS will be much better than a Drupal configuration that duplicates its precise functionality.
-- Adrian Rossouw Drupal developer and Bryght Guy http://drupal.org | http://bryght.com
On 2/23/06, Adrian Rossouw <adrian@bryght.com> wrote:
*NEWSFLASH* Google buys Drupal and renames it Goopal.
In complete unrelated news, Dries Buytaert was seen driving a new Ferrari through the streets of Antwerp.
Its a Porsche he wants, not a Ferrari...
On 23 Feb 2006, at 8:58 PM, Khalid B wrote:
On 2/23/06, Adrian Rossouw <adrian@bryght.com> wrote:
*NEWSFLASH* Google buys Drupal and renames it Goopal.
In complete unrelated news, Dries Buytaert was seen driving a new Ferrari through the streets of Antwerp.
Its a Porsche he wants, not a Ferrari...
they both have four wheels and make people think you're not well endowed. they both come in red too =) -- Adrian Rossouw Drupal developer and Bryght Guy http://drupal.org | http://bryght.com
Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Its a Porsche he wants, not a Ferrari...
they both have four wheels and make people think you're not well endowed. they both come in red too =)
Heresy! Well, maybe if it's a Boxter...
On 2/23/06, Jeff Eaton <jeff@viapositiva.net> wrote:
This is a potential problem for places like Bryght, but I don't see Google really competing with mambo/joomla/xoops/drupal/phpnuke.
There are plenty of shops out there doing well with their own homebrew CMS system with a fraction of drupal's deployments and feature. The issue isn't technology, it's service and support. Technology doesn't have value, solutions do. On that note, I want to rant about Drupal a bit. Drupal has a very impressive amount of geek brain power behind it. The node system, the hook system, the module system, the new FAPI, all of that stuff is extremely clever. Very smart stuff. However, featurewise, that stuff is really only important to developers. I think there needs to be more focus on solving real problems. Featurewise, this is what I'm missing in Drupal core: 1. Pluggable authentication support. I'm talking about a user.module that uses LDAP, or Kerberos, or whatever for authentication, and doesn't need to maintain an external user record. 2. i18n and l10n support in core. Just started looking into this, and just started looking at Jose Reyero's i18n module. Apparently doesn't need to patch against core anymore, but need to investigate more. This is what I think is needed for the project: These are obversations from reading through the dev list. This is mostly addressing my confusion of where responsibilities lie. 1. Better deligation of responsibilities. - A core team: Handles core development, approves user contributed patches, etc. - A security team: maintains old releases and back ports bug fixes, not functionality. - A release team: handles release timelines, documentation, and all the responsibility of making the latest version of drupal ready for public consumption. - A contributions team: provides support for contributors. Maintains the contributions list, isn't there a better way than one _long_ list of modules? Does the buck stops at Dries on the direction and organization of Drupal development? It seems to me that Drupal has gained enough traction and popularity that a development, maintenance and support model needs to be decided on. Some off the top of my head: The FreeBSD model - I outlined it above. The OpenBSD model - One supreme dictator, lots of hackers. (i think) The Linux model - Here's a core, everything else is up to you. Drupal is like a distribution now, I dunno if this model would work. The Commercial Model: probably wouldn't work. Ben.
-----Original Message----- From: Benson Wong [mailto:mostlygeek@gmail.com]
On 2/23/06, Jeff Eaton <jeff@viapositiva.net> wrote:
This is a potential problem for places like Bryght, but I don't see Google really competing with mambo/joomla/xoops/drupal/phpnuke.
There are plenty of shops out there doing well with their own homebrew CMS system with a fraction of drupal's deployments and feature. The issue isn't technology, it's service and support. Technology doesn't have value, solutions do.
Last I checked, Google wasn't the industry leader in service and support unless that means something different than what I understand it to mean. Those homebrew CMS systems you mention are probably, it's worth noting, better at what THEY do than Google's CMS system is likely to be. Why? Google's services, for all their coolness and spiffiness, are NOT about customization or building application-specific solutions. That's what I mean when I say that Google's hypothetical future CMS will be better at what it does than joomla/mambo/xoops/drupal/phpnuke -- but it will be far worse at duplicating all the things those customizable cms systems can do. It's certainly possible that Google will get into the managed hosting business, but I doubt that one.
On that note, I want to rant about Drupal a bit. Drupal has a very impressive amount of geek brain power behind it. The node system, the hook system, the module system, the new FAPI, all of that stuff is extremely clever. Very smart stuff. However, featurewise, that stuff is really only important to developers. I think there needs to be more focus on solving real problems.
News flash: developers added those features in order to solve real problems. Look at individual Drupal-based sites to see what I mean. Downloading core and staring at it has never been, and will never be, the way to judge whether Drupal 'solves real problems.'
1. Better deligation of responsibilities.
- A core team: Handles core development, approves user contributed patches, etc.
Dries and Steven, with help from an active group of 'inner circle' devs who know the system very well.
- A security team: maintains old releases and back ports bug fixes, not functionality.
chx, with help from others, IIRC.
- A release team: handles release timelines, documentation, and all the responsibility of making the latest version of drupal ready for public consumption.
That horse is dead. Very, very dead. Everyone knows and this one isn't going to fall through the cracks.
The Linux model - Here's a core, everything else is up to you. Drupal is like a distribution now, I dunno if this model would work.
I'm all in favor of stripping even more features out of drupal core, leaving it more API oriented, and leaving it up to others to package 'distributions'. With the new .install files for modules, it wouldn't be difficult, either. Install core, drag the 'distibution package' to the drupal/sites directory, change the url and database in the settings.php file, and you're ready to go. --Jeff
News flash: developers added those features in order to solve real problems. Look at individual Drupal-based sites to see what I mean. Downloading core and staring at it has never been, and will never be, the way to judge whether Drupal 'solves real problems.'
I agree. I've been actively developing a very large web site using Drupal 4.7 for the last few months. I wrote a lot of code that ties into almost every part of Drupal. I've also run into road blocks that are Drupal specific. I'm not (completely at least) talking out of my ass. Let me elaborate on real problems. Drupal is a great online community tool. Its heritage (IIRC) is a student collaboration / information sharing tool. As a content management system it is lacking some essential features, core support for i18n being #1 (IMHO). People are using Drupal exclusively as a CMS rather than a online community tool. That should be taken into consideration. At OSCMS I met a couple of people who left their jobs to be full time drupal consultants. There is a growing economy building behind the project. What's evolving out of Drupal's popularity as a CMS is Drupal the Product. The difference is the Product has responsibilities: 1. It has to keep up with the competition. i18n support, pluggable authentication, etc. 2. Security 3. Support 4. Available developer base. 5. etc. As more people use Drupal (bryght, consultants, other companies) as a part of their business, the Product has a responsibility to ensure that changes do not completely screw those people over. Livelihoods are starting to depend on Drupal. There is some social responsibility in the project now. So some real world considerations: 1. Where is the long term roadmap to Drupal? 2. What is the long term support structure for Drupal - I spent $200,000 building Site X on Drupal 4.8, how do I maintain (security, new features, etc) it for 2 years? 3. I spent $15,000 building Module Y, for 4.7, what are my options for moving forward with 4.8, 4.9, etc. 4. And so on... These considerations might not matter to geeks/developers adding in features, but it matters to people who depend on this software to provide them a solution. An similar situation, PHP3 disappeared quickly after PHP4 came out. PHP4 will be around for _years_, even after PHP6 comes out. Drupal is headed in that same direction. My point is, the project needs more planning to balance reaction. Developers should be allowed to build any contribution they want, but core should not change so much as it breaks functionality between point releases. Ben.
On 2/24/06, Benson Wong <mostlygeek@gmail.com> wrote:
So some real world considerations:
1. Where is the long term roadmap to Drupal?
2. What is the long term support structure for Drupal - I spent $200,000 building Site X on Drupal 4.8, how do I maintain (security, new features, etc) it for 2 years?
3. I spent $15,000 building Module Y, for 4.7, what are my options for moving forward with 4.8, 4.9, etc.
4. And so on...
These considerations might not matter to geeks/developers adding in features, but it matters to people who depend on this software to provide them a solution. An similar situation, PHP3 disappeared quickly after PHP4 came out. PHP4 will be around for _years_, even after PHP6 comes out.
Drupal is headed in that same direction. My point is, the project needs more planning to balance reaction. Developers should be allowed to build any contribution they want, but core should not change so much as it breaks functionality between point releases.
Ben.
I completly agree with Ben. Due to many core changes i had to rewrite most of my development :( However, i have to admit the new FAPI is a great job and certainly won't change for years. Best regards
As more people use Drupal (bryght, consultants, other companies) as a part of their business, the Product has a responsibility to ensure that changes do not completely screw those people over. Livelihoods are starting to depend on Drupal. There is some social responsibility in the project now.
They reason we got this far is exactly because we've been disruptive. Our primary focus is technology, not supporting businesses. We are respsonible for the technology we create and the bugs we introduce, but we can't be held responsible for keeping your customers happy. If you sell Drupal to customers who can't deal with Drupal being disruptive from time to time, then you sold them the wrong solution or you didn't educate them properly. You can't blame us for that. If customers know what to expect, and if they plan accordingly, they won't be 'completely screwed'. That said, we do care about your customers, but it is not our primary focus. It's yours. -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:17:01 +0100, Benson Wong <mostlygeek@gmail.com> wrote:
Let me elaborate on real problems.
Benson, This is _your_ problem. In less then a day you have written two letters which first wants to reform the way community works, second you manage to define "the real problems". Who do you think you are?
On 24 Feb 2006, at 10:01, Karoly Negyesi wrote:
This is _your_ problem. In less then a day you have written two letters which first wants to reform the way community works, second you manage to define "the real problems". Who do you think you are?
Ben isn't "forcing" us to make any changes. He is just sharing his opinion in a friendly/constructive tone. It's good to know people's opinion, or to talk about them. Ben is right when he says that there are a large number of people using Drupal to create brochure websites, and that there is plenty of room for improvement in that area. Like Ben, I think i18n is getting increasingly important. It's critical functionality. Similarly, security is getting increasingly important and one day the security state of the contributed modules is going to backfire like there is no tomorrow. I second many of Ben's statements. At the same time, I disagree with his statement that core should change less only because we should care more about his customers getting screwed. -- Dries Buytaert :: http://www.buytaert.net/
Op vrijdag 24 februari 2006 10:51, schreef Dries Buytaert:
Ben is right when he says that there are a large number of people using Drupal to create brochure websites, and that there is plenty of room for improvement in that area. Like Ben, I think i18n is getting increasingly important. It's critical functionality. Similarly, security is getting increasingly important and one day the security state of the contributed modules is going to backfire like there is no tomorrow. I second many of Ben's statements. At the same time, I disagree with his statement that core should change less only because we should care more about his customers getting screwed.
yes. Being in his boat ever since 3.x (yay) I have seen it all pass by. :) It is very good to see disruptveness. Most ofte you will find, with a bit of creativity, that in fact Drupal has solved new problems for your new and old clients. Those part where too little disruptiveness took place you will see dusty corners in Drupal. Those are either places where we (lack of interest) did not spend enough development hours on, or where the ideas and needs/wants aer so different that any proposed solution ended in a big explosion of debates :) I can advice anyone with this continuity problem to revice his service model. I found that maintaining a 4.4 site is not much work at all: yes it is insecure, yes it has bugs, but that particular client has a site, and choses not to pay for improvements. So 'maintainance' for me is: nothing! No one forces you to upgrade. Something that cannot be said about the "industry packages" by the way. -- [ Bèr Kessels | Drupal services www.webschuur.com ]
On 24-Feb-06, at 1:01 AM, Karoly Negyesi wrote:
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:17:01 +0100, Benson Wong <mostlygeek@gmail.com> wrote:
Let me elaborate on real problems.
Benson,
This is _your_ problem. In less then a day you have written two letters which first wants to reform the way community works, second you manage to define "the real problems". Who do you think you are?
Someone who is passionate and wants to offer constructive criticism, and is also one of the best PHP programmers I know. chx -- any answer of the form "who do you think you are?" are not appropriate for this list. Feel free to flame people in IRC. P.S. Who were you when you started? -- Boris Mann Vancouver 778-896-2747 San Francisco 415-367-3595 SKYPE borismann http://www.bryght.com
On Thu, 2006-02-23 at 15:17 -0800, Benson Wong wrote:
What's evolving out of Drupal's popularity as a CMS is Drupal the Product. The difference is the Product has responsibilities:
1. It has to keep up with the competition. i18n support, pluggable authentication, etc. 2. Security 3. Support 4. Available developer base. 5. etc. bah, bah, bah. Drupal is not a product. The websites and their functionality that Drupal consultants and developers create are the product here.
1. Where is the long term roadmap to Drupal?
innovative flexible technology?
2. What is the long term support structure for Drupal - I spent $200,000 building Site X on Drupal 4.8, how do I maintain (security, new features, etc) it for 2 years?
Umm, aren't you a programmer or consultant? You should pay a programmer or consultant to make sure your needs are met if you are unable to meet them yourself. I would suggest that you never build a business model on external factors that you have no control over.
3. I spent $15,000 building Module Y, for 4.7, what are my options for moving forward with 4.8, 4.9, etc.
Umm, upgrading modules from 4.6 -> 4.7 takes about 8 hours total. I'm sure if you spent 15k on it in the first place, another 800 won't kill you. Especially, if your business depends on it.
4. And so on...
I think it is silly to expect an open source community to cover your business's tail.
These considerations might not matter to geeks/developers adding in features, but it matters to people who depend on this software to provide them a solution. An similar situation, PHP3 disappeared quickly after PHP4 came out. PHP4 will be around for _years_, even after PHP6 comes out.
You don't have to upgrade, security releases will be made. Upgrade path's are in place for most everything. What are you stressing over? Contrib module X that you use isn't updated at the same time as core. Well upgrade or contact that contribs author...
Drupal is headed in that same direction. My point is, the project needs more planning to balance reaction. Developers should be allowed to build any contribution they want, but core should not change so much as it breaks functionality between point releases.
Developers are allowed to build whatever contribution they want. Core does break functionality between releases. Drupal has no guaranteed backwards compatibility. Stick to the same core API version if you need to. I have production servers still running linux 2.0.x kernels... Why, no need to upgrade! You don't have to. We aren't microsoft. You can make your own security fixes. Its OPEN SOURCE!!!!! We don't force obselescence. You can fork for your project if you need. Whatever...
Ben.
.darrel.
This comes down to the question of whether the disruptive technologies and economies of this new era can truly compete with the centralized megacorp models. We're seeing the big corporations having a big problem adapting to the fast microchanges in the long tail economy -- which is where most industries are heading. Google may buy some time by offering a Google CMS, but I think ultimately the people who go for that are the people who are not considering Drupal now -- they WANT a hosted, managed, just-tell-me-what-to-do system. Drupal is on the opposite end of the paradigm, and appeals to different people who think differently than those who want the corporate-sponsored service. Who uses AOL and who puts their internet services together themselves? Who blogs on Blogger and who downloads Wordpress or MT (or Drupal!) and does it themselves? What Google does certainly is worth noticing, given how huge they are. But I truly wonder at how a megacorp can compete in a marketplace that's all about personal empowerment, which is where we, in all our Drupal-related niches, live. Laura Steve Dondley wrote:
This has been in the back of my mind for a couple of months. What's to stop Google from hosting their own Drupal-like community software? It's inevetible in my opinion. Maybe not this year or next, but certainly within a decade.
On 2/23/06, Moshe Weitzman <weitzman@tejasa.com> wrote:
Adrian Rossouw wrote:
Go play with the site editor, that's how our themes should work damnit.
layouts / skins
by site editor, do you mean the part link for 'change look'?
and isn't our current theme system all about layouts/skins? what do you mean exactly? layout=chameleon, skin=marvin
this google tool is impressive as far as user experience goes. but really, anyone who wants a site like this has far simpler tools to employ than drupal? when google decides to offer a CMS, then we are in for a fight. according to some rumors, this is forthcoming ...
-- Dondley Communications http://www.dondleycommunications.com
Communicate or Die: American Labor Unions and the Internet http://www.communicateordie.com
-- *Laura Scott*, President pingVision <http://www.pingv.com/> | interactive media design 4450 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 100 Boulder, CO 80303 303.415.2559 laura@pingv.com
On 2/23/06, Laura Scott <laura@pingv.com> wrote:
This comes down to the question of whether the disruptive technologies and economies of this new era can truly compete with the centralized megacorp models.
What do you mean by this? Is Drupal considered a distruptive technology? What makes it disruptive? (I've been living under a rock for a while...)
We're seeing the big corporations having a big problem adapting to the fast microchanges in the long tail economy -- which is where most industries are heading.
Including the economical side Drupal. Consider the people who do full time Drupal consulting. Consider Bryght, Lullabot, CivicSpace. I think these people and companies are servicing that "long tail", basically, small to medium sized business that have a three to five figure budget for their website.
Google may buy some time by offering a Google CMS, but I think ultimately the people who go for that are the people who are not considering Drupal now -- they WANT a hosted, managed, just-tell-me-what-to-do system. Drupal is on
Psst...bryght.com.
the opposite end of the paradigm, and appeals to different people who think differently than those who want the corporate-sponsored service.
Who uses AOL and who puts their internet services together themselves? Who blogs on Blogger and who downloads Wordpress or MT (or Drupal!) and does it themselves?
What Google does certainly is worth noticing, given how huge they are. But I truly wonder at how a megacorp can compete in a marketplace that's all about personal empowerment, which is where we, in all our Drupal-related niches, live.
I think you need to make a distinction between what kind of personal empowerment you're talking about. Drupal does not empower the majority of the public, it's too hard to use. It empowers programmers and systems integrators. Blogger, Pages, Typepad, that empowers the general public. People who are very intelligent and skilled in something other than web application installation. There are way more of these people than PHP programmers and sysadmins. Competing with Blogger and Typepad isn't really what Drupal is about. Leave that to companies like Bryght. Drupal development should be focused on solutions, on buildling the #1 OS CMS. I honestly think we're almost there. Add in i18n support, make it easier to use, and we got a world class product. Ben.
Benson Wong wrote:
On 2/23/06, Laura Scott <laura@pingv.com> wrote:
This comes down to the question of whether the disruptive technologies and economies of this new era can truly compete with the centralized megacorp models.
What do you mean by this? Is Drupal considered a distruptive technology? What makes it disruptive? (I've been living under a rock for a while...)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disruptive_technology -- And I think the concept bleeds into disruptive economies, as well. I suppose that's what Seth Godin et al. have been blogging about all these years now. Also the Cluetrain.
the opposite end of the paradigm, and appeals to different people who think differently than those who want the corporate-sponsored service.
Who uses AOL and who puts their internet services together themselves? Who blogs on Blogger and who downloads Wordpress or MT (or Drupal!) and does it themselves?
What Google does certainly is worth noticing, given how huge they are. But I truly wonder at how a megacorp can compete in a marketplace that's all about personal empowerment, which is where we, in all our Drupal-related niches, live.
I think you need to make a distinction between what kind of personal empowerment you're talking about.
Drupal does not empower the majority of the public, it's too hard to use. It empowers programmers and systems integrators.
I'm not talking about the majority of the public -- I'm talking about the long tail, again. Anything owned and branded by Google is not going to be empowering, in the end -- not if there are licensing ownership issues involved.
Blogger, Pages, Typepad, that empowers the general public. People who are very intelligent and skilled in something other than web application installation. There are way more of these people than PHP programmers and sysadmins.
These systems empower people, yes, but only as long as it's convenient and/or profitable for the megacorps.
Competing with Blogger and Typepad isn't really what Drupal is about. Leave that to companies like Bryght.
I believe we are in agreement here.
Drupal development should be focused on solutions, on buildling the #1 OS CMS. I honestly think we're almost there. Add in i18n support, make it easier to use, and we got a world class product.
I feel that Drupal "should" become what the community makes of it. It's that organic quality that gives it much relevance and appeal. Laura
participants (17)
-
Adrian Rossouw -
Benson Wong -
Boris Mann -
Bèr Kessels -
Chris Cook -
Darrel O'Pry -
Dries Buytaert -
Earl Dunovant -
Gildas Cotomale -
Jeff Eaton -
Karoly Negyesi -
Khalid B -
Laura Scott -
Moshe Weitzman -
Rowan Kerr -
Steve Dondley -
Steve Dondley