[sakai2-tcc] Infrastructure discussion for future meeting?

[John Bush]

I think the hell broke loss in a difference opinion on how that list
is generated.  You were asking for “Focus groups, steering committees,
surveys, evangelists and visionaries, connecting with the people that
have the skills,…".

Most of the types of things Dave Adams is talking about are not about
features, they are about the capabilities of the core technical
platform.  The platform doesn't really need input from focus groups
and all the visionaries.  Honestly, we have too many features, we need
to do less and do it better.  We need to get back to being more of a
platform.  The LMS market doesn't want a big monolithic "do it all"
offering anymore.  People want best of breed, and they want a core
platform that integrates with everything.  Its really devolving into
more of a portal, IMHO.  Things like LTI and the services keitai will
produce are things we are doing right in that spirit.  But in order
for people to really trust CLE is capable of being that glue holding
everything together, it has to be able to tackle the scaling,
performance, and management problems it has.  I think those things are
paramount, expanding the feature set really has to always be second to
that focus, if we really want to succeed at this point.

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Steve Swinsburg
<steve.swinsburg at gmail.com> wrote:
> So are we saying that we need some sort of concerted effort to identify the
> major issues that people can work on for 2.10 and beyond, rally for funding
> and mentor/manage the people working on these issues?
>
> Sorry to sound like a cynic but when I said that 6 months ago all hell broke
> loose:
>
> http://steveswinsburg.wordpress.com/2012/09/24/planning-for-sakai-2-10-and-beyond/
>
> I am all for this idea and have several developer resources to apply.
>
> Cheers
> Steve
>
> Gesendent von meinem iPhone
>
> On 13/03/2013, at 7:29, "Berg, Alan" <A.M.Berg at uva.nl> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I was speculating that  if we had a list of concrete actions that we can
> scope into to units of effort, then we advertise and then crowd fund within
> the community.
>
> Funding could be:
>
> Money
> Developer hours
> Student hours with mentoring
> Or any unit that we can convert into an impulse.
>
> I was speculating that perhaps we don't need infrastructure todo this. We
> could use for example a Google form and push at the conference. For example,
> the Sakaigersden, but with the expectation of resource owners turning up
> with real resources.
>
> Examples include:
>
> http://crowdfunding.piwik.org/
> http://selfstarter.us/
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>            Alan
>
>
> Alan Berg
>
> Innovation working group
> On the use of ICT in Education & Research
> University of Amsterdam
> ________________________________
> From: sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org
> [sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] on behalf of Charles Severance
> [csev at umich.edu]
> Sent: 12 March 2013 21:05
> To: sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org Committee
> Subject: Re: [sakai2-tcc] Infrastructure discussion for future meeting?
>
> Dave -
>
> I agree with what you say below - if you read my message further - I
> suggested that we (the TCC) even keep track of *who* would be the right
> folks to work on these things - since a random developer is not (as you say)
> likely to go into these things - but we may know a person or organization
> that might go after something for $10K-$20K - we would raise funds and then
> we would help make sure the funds went to someone competent to make the
> progress.
>
> I am not suggesting we hope to find random free developers who without any
> prior Sakai dev skill would be able to fix our sticky session problem :)  I
> am talking about the "old fashioned" resource - money.   And Alan's
> suggestion for some kind of crowd-fund raising has some real merits.
>
> /Chuck
>
> On Mar 12, 2013, at 2:44 PM, David Adams wrote:
>
> That level of specificity and purpose will be required to shake the
> "hypothetical" resources free. Otherwise, it will remain just be a big
> list of things no one will ever tackle.
>
> Another big reason institutions are shy about taking leadership on
> these projects themselves is the risk that their contributions will be
> ignored or turn out to have been misguided. If the TCC takes the lead,
> they can be relatively sure the work will be going to good use, will
> be technically sound within the Sakai architecture, and will end up in
> the community code and will generate a clear benefit and not a
> fruitless burden. Not to mention it's good experience and training for
> their staff to be able to work directly with the icons of the Sakai
> community.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
>



--
John Bush
602-490-0470