You might find it interesting to visit this place
It is ONLY a thought at the moment.
Quite frankly at the moment I for one have my doubts.
Discourse
Archived thread 2149729 from Forum Members Chat. Markdown source: Forum_Members_Chat/thread_2149729_Discourse.md
I saw that last night (NZ time) and the exchange between you and Jorge.
I commend you on the way you expressed yourself, and I agree with you about the poor communication. I'm a mod on another support forum, and we get told about new features or even informational mailings well *before* they happen. We test the new features and even write the documentation.
Anyway, what's this Discourse thing about? How would it fit into the overall scheme of things? To me, it's not at all obvious.
Irihapeti said: I saw that last night (NZ time) and the exchange between you and Jorge.
I commend you on the way you expressed yourself, and I agree with you about the poor communication. I'm a mod on another support forum, and we get told about new features or even informational mailings well *before* they happen. We test the new features and even write the documentation.
Anyway, what's this Discourse thing about? How would it fit into the overall scheme of things? To me, it's not at all obvious.
I totally understand that. I'm not too er.. sure about this new Discourse thing as it seems *very* rough around the edges.
As far as I can tell it seems like Jorge wants a new platform for support (I think... not too sure about it.. but I know he doesn't like vbulletin). It feels very clunky to me and I'd probably not use it.
Seems like they are trying to reinvent the wheel tbh. :confused:
As far as I personally am concerned, it's about supporting people who need help. The exact platform used is a secondary concern. But it does have to work properly for everyone. (The other forum I referred to uses Kunena, and one or two things about it drive me nuts...)
Seems like they are trying to reinvent the wheel tbh. :confused:
Ummm..... Isn't that in the nature of open source - if in doubt, make a new one? :)
It makes my head hurt, lol. Did our users really need a third Canonical sponsored help site? (Fourth when counting IRC.)
If I were a new user, this would confuse the heck out of me, then I'd run off screaming when I got a different answer to the same question via each venue.
And don't forget the non-Canonical sites e.g. omgubuntu and askubuntu and...... ???????????? I shalln't be starting an Ubuntu blog in the near future, that's for sure.
Mind you, a user can get various answers just on these forums. One of my pet peeves is when I reply to a question, asking some questions of my own to get more information, and then some super-poster comes along and acts like I've said nothing. Has me wondering if there's something wrong with my posting style :(
Well askubuntu is Jorge's baby, but I don't know if it is directly backed by Canonical or not. Each area serves a different purpose. The forums tend to have discussion, while Askubuntu is more for Q&A stuff.
IRC is a different beast alltogether. :)
And looking at AskUbuntu (and the other StackExchange sites), it seems that there's quite a bit of carry-on about whether a question should even be asked.
Each to his/her own, I guess...
And enough from me for the moment (do you have a smilie show person with cork in mouth? :) )
Irihapeti said:
And enough from me for the moment (do you have a smilie show person with cork in mouth? :) )
No, but we have this one... ](*,)
:D
No, not the same thing. *I'm* the one who needs to put a cork in it in this instance... :)
CharlesA said: Well askubuntu is Jorge's baby, but I don't know if it is directly backed by Canonical or not. Each area serves a different purpose. The forums tend to have discussion, while Askubuntu is more for Q&A stuff.
IRC is a different beast alltogether. :)
K, I thought askubuntu(AU) was supported by Canonical. It's site gives the vibe of being a supported gig. While we know there are differences between UF and AU, I wouldn't expect someone searching for help to recognize the difference.
Since the site is already moving forward there is no reason for me to oppose it. If it proves to be helpful for newcomers, then it is a good thing.:KS
IT's not moving forward - it's being fiddled about with.
At the moment they are trying to think about how to not migrate vb data - that'll work then ...
As coffeecat has said - this is a solution looking for a problem,
Trouble is, sometimes they find what they think is a problem – and then it becomes one in reality.
Let's hope not.
Indeed ...
It's not a good move and doesn't have my support.
When I first saw it, and didn't know what it was, I though that maybe it was a system for pulling the hot topics from the forums and elsewhere, a bit like Planet Ubuntu does with blog feeds. That *might* have some point to it.
I'm struggling to work out what the point of it is. I'm trying to keep an open mind and intend to explore it more fully over the next few days when I have time - and am also trying to put aside my irritation at the way it was publicly announced. But from what I've seen so far, much of the discussion there seems to circle around trying to reproduce the functionality that we already have here with a VBulletin forum. As already mentioned - re-inventions and wheels. If there are *significant* features that it is impossible to provide on traditional forum software, then that would certainly be valuable. Are there? Perhaps someone could enlighten me.
As far as replacing vbulletin because it is proprietary, why? Cost? - I suspect the annual licence fee, a couple of hundred dollars, is a flea-bite compared with the cost of running and maintaining the servers. If because of some sort of open source evangelism, then I personally am not interested. If because of concerns about the future of vbulletin, then yes I am interested. From what I can make out, the company that bought up vbulletin a couple of years ago appears to have a poor customer reputation, which if true would be concerning. And the way they are taking vbulletin in VB5 looks like the Microsoft Office story all over again. You have a feature full piece of software and to keep your revenue stream growing, you have to add obscure bells and whistles. Which may mean that to get the security enhancements of newer versions we may need to commit to the hard work of upgrading to feature sets that we don't actually need. The VB3 -> VB4 upgrade earlier this year was hard work and stressful. So for those last two reasons alone, I'm prepared to have a look at open source alternatives, but with a healthy dose of scepticism.
There is a bunch of stuff that I like such as just in time loading, signing in with existing credentials and real time updates but as a replacement for a category based "forum" site, I don't think so. Seems a better fit for Ask Ubuntu.
Sad how the atmosphere appears so much "them and us" when supposedly the communication has been had with the FC. Although the phrase "anyone but Jorge" springs to mind.
coffeecat said: I'm struggling to work out what the point of it is.... But from what I've seen so far, much of the discussion there seems to circle around trying to reproduce the functionality that we already have here with a VBulletin forum. As already mentioned - re-inventions and wheels. If there are *significant* features that it is impossible to provide on traditional forum software, then that would certainly be valuable. Are there? Perhaps someone could enlighten me.
This is pretty much how I feel. I've not seen anything worth the upheaval.
coffeecat said: As far as replacing vbulletin because it is proprietary, why? Cost?
I expect that their it is an annual support cost, however given that canonical are incapable of registering an account with vbulletin I am not convinced they are getting the most for their money.
coffeecat said: I'm struggling to work out what the point of it is. I'm trying to keep an open mind and intend to explore it more fully over the next few days when I have time - and am also trying to put aside my irritation at the way it was publicly announced.
...
....So for those last two reasons alone, I'm prepared to have a look at open source alternatives, but with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Are just about the only reasons I'm bothering.
howefield said: There is a bunch of stuff that I like such as just in time loading, signing in with existing credentials and real time updates but ...
There's one feature I quite like - you can PM with more than one person.
As far as the just in time loading - if you mean in thread view, where it updates in real time - we have that here :)
It seems also - any comment that appears to be any kind of roadblock is met with resistance from the devs. Perhaps they are beginning to see that their baby isn't as great as they thought.
Frankly when I asked hwo they planned to migrate data from other platforms I was fairly flabbergasted to be told archive it and start again.
It hasn't helped matters that Canonical's Communication lecturer ,or whoever they take lessons from, has been working fulltime again apparently.
Hmmm... let us have a look at some of the issues that was had for the last year or two. A closed source platform that easily gets outdated and not many people seem to care to make changes that would suit "us" specifically. Sure there are plug-ins but do they do exactly what we want?
Now there is an open platform, very young and ruff around the edges, open source and exciting, which does already have a number of cool features, and lacking others. Would it not add value to the forum if we jump in now, while the excitement is high and start getting the things we need in place. The forum isn't going to be ported over just like that. And if needs and wants and musts are defined by us now, and we ensure they are there before the Council accepts the possibility of a migration then wouldn't that in the end leave us in a better position than we started?
I am going to be openly critical of especially the admins in this more private setting - I feel the attitude of the admins and some of the interactions on the very public and accessible discourse site currently very negative and argumentative. I am sorry you feel hard done by with the site going live in the fashion it has, but I believe it is currently nothing more than a play ground to see what is and what isn't, and perhaps it was a tad silly for them to put ubuntu branding on it and possibly cause some confusion, but should this now cause us to miss a golden opportunity to better that which we have?!
:/
Nobody that stands on the other side of the forum knows the workings of the forum as the staff does, and if we don't ensure that we get what is needed eventually the call will be made for the change (heck, might be for something silly like SSO) and then we have to live with it... and if it is bad no point in standing back laughing and pointing fingers saying "I told you so" when there is something that can be done about it now. I will stop typing now because my blood pressure is increasing dangerously.
not found said:
Now there is an open platform, very young and ruff around the edges, open source and exciting, which does already have a number of cool features, and lacking others. Would it not add value to the forum if we jump in now, while the excitement is high and start getting the things we need in place.
Completely agree. I'm not entirely sure I understand this new platform or what its aims are, but jumping in early to make our mark is something I think we should do.
not found said: Hmmm... let us have a look at some of the issues that was had for the last year or two. A closed source platform that easily gets outdated and not many people seem to care to make changes that would suit "us" specifically. Sure there are plug-ins but do they do exactly what we want?
Now there is an open platform, very young and ruff around the edges, open source and exciting, which does already have a number of cool features, and lacking others. Would it not add value to the forum if we jump in now, while the excitement is high and start getting the things we need in place. The forum isn't going to be ported over just like that. And if needs and wants and musts are defined by us now, and we ensure they are there before the Council accepts the possibility of a migration then wouldn't that in the end leave us in a better position than we started?
I am going to be openly critical of especially the admins in this more private setting - I feel the attitude of the admins and some of the interactions on the very public and accessible discourse site currently very negative and argumentative. I am sorry you feel hard done by with the site going live in the fashion it has, but I believe it is currently nothing more than a play ground to see what is and what isn't, and perhaps it was a tad silly for them to put ubuntu branding on it and possibly cause some confusion, but should this now cause us to miss a golden opportunity to better that which we have?!
:/
Nobody that stands on the other side of the forum knows the workings of the forum as the staff does, and if we don't ensure that we get what is needed eventually the call will be made for the change (heck, might be for something silly like SSO) and then we have to live with it... and if it is bad no point in standing back laughing and pointing fingers saying "I told you so" when there is something that can be done about it now. I will stop typing now because my blood pressure is increasing dangerously.
I'm with you one-hundred-percent.
We're trying something new.
Nothing is set in stone.
It is beta.
There will be issues.
There are Discourse developers taking feedback.
Should this ever become the way forward, I'm sure we'll know well in advance.
(cortman walks in, late to the game as always)
This "Discourse" appears to be some new form of open-source forums software? If so, that's fantastic! It looks pretty decent already although I don't have any idea of how it runs yet. If this is the way the forums will eventually go, I don't think I have a problem with it. If it's meant to be YAUSV (Yet Another Ubuntu Support Venue) then I question its purpose/utility.
I can agree with both the enthusiasm and the reservations; but overall it looks interesting.
(lisati walks in, having [s]ignored[/s] missed a day or so of discussion and having to spend a bit of time doing some quick reading just to catch up)
No doubt it will find its niche once the feedback is taken on board and the wrinkles are ironed out, the jury here is still out.
It seems that there are two separate issues (actually, very likely more than that). The software itself and the use to which it might be put i.e. YAUSV or a longer-term upgrade path.
I think I can see both points of view. You don't want to have to shift to something that won't do what you want and create a whole lot of extra work into the bargain. On the other hand, you don't want to end up like some of those who stayed with 10.04 until the bitter end and now don't quite know what to do. Where/how to find the balance? I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.
Meanwhile the conspiracy theorists in the cafe are no doubt having a field day. I haven't read that thread and I'm not going to. My doctor wouldn't like the effect on my blood pressure.
Irihapeti said: Meanwhile the conspiracy theorists in the cafe are no doubt having a field day. I haven't read that thread and I'm not going to. My doctor wouldn't like the effect on my blood pressure.
On the other hand sometimes a good dose of comedy is just what the doctor ordered :p
404
:-#> Irihapeti said:
(do you have a smilie show person with cork in mouth? :) ):-# :-$ [-(
Pick one... no corks, though.