Steven writes some good stuff about communities and content management products. He's totally spot-on when talking about the importance of community participation. But Steven, I think you may be hitting below the belt with this:
Next, I detect a subtle difference in style between this and this. I'd say the first link with its big red box isn't particularly inviting.
Steven carefully links to the download page for Hippo, which carries the warning. A fairer equivalent would be the Hippo CMS home page.
Steven knows the history behind the Hippo CMS product - a long slow march towards being able to fully release it as an Open Source product. (Who doesn't remember the fateful "it will be released as Open Source by December" statement during the CMS shootout at the 2004 Cocoon GetTogether?)
Inevitably for a product with a long history and a product that was not conceived as an Open Source solution, there's a need for the Hippo folk to do some housekeeping to ensure their product is truly open - in the same diligent way and with the same attention to detail we find in Apache projects. So is the Hippo message Steven refers to any less of an honest warning than the one given by Daisy?
Yes, it's hard to make sure the system is documented enough for external developers - but why the emphasis on making money off them? Isn't it more important to get them involved in the community, where they are far more valuable than a simple financial bottom line? If you are able to get a viable community, the documentation will follow - as in the case of Daisy's contributed documentation.
Yes, it's hard to open up a development process. It needs encouragement and support by the wider community, not subtle pot-shots from those fortunate enough to have started in the open to begin with. Let's save that for the bait-and-switch folk ;-)
Disclosure: I'm one of the Hippo integration partners, currently feeling the pain of helping them move toward a viable Open Source product (and after today, I think I'll start muttering that they need to blog more, too). I've also helped customers to get up and running with Daisy. I think both CMSes are mighty fine products.
Posted by savs at March 10, 2006 5:57 PMDon't classify my post as a pot-shot: you know us better than that.
I think Daisy has a lot to learn about community participation as well and I really, really like it when I see contenders in the CMS space share the same base platfom (Apache Cocoon) with us.
But as always with written communication: read what I write, and read everything.
Cheers! :D
Posted by: Steven Noels at March 10, 2006 10:26 PM