Seems Telligent doesn't understand what they bought here.
There are already 1000's of forum products - Telligent Community, err, "Zimbra Community" is only 1 fish in the ocean. You aren't going to be the next Linkedin (that ship has sailed), nor can I foresee hundreds of companies buying your "social" platform.
On the other hand -- Zimbra competed in a space with far, far less competition, and quite frankly - was doing very well. Zimba is one of (the only?) main competitor to Microsoft Exchange -- the opportunity here is/was huge. MS Exchange is the go-to heavyweight for enterprise email, but Zimbra offered a lot of very attractive options to lure people in - it runs on linux, had a thriving community with a huge knowledgebase, heavily customizable, open source, modules/plugins, TCO was far less, plus an awful lot more. This was/is a huge winning package.
Telligent even changed their name to "Zimbra, Inc" as-if that would carry some weight into the forums market? If you are Zimbra, Inc... then Zimbra should come first and foremost.
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
-
dominix
- Advanced member
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 1:07 am
- Location: Pacific sud
- ZCS/ZD Version: 7.2.7 ... 8.8.15 ... 9.0.0
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
trying to make a community of linux admin that operate linux services, adopt a windows-server based product is completely counterproductive.
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
You are right: there are 1,000s of forum products and we have no intention of being the next LinkedIn or stand-alone social network.
That said, our forums product is used by 1,000s of companies for technical (https://community.rackspace.com), marketing (http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/) and governments (https://www.apan.org). We did a terrible job of rolling it out for ourselves though - but we are working through the feedback.
Zimbra Collaboration is a phenomenal product and one that we have (hopefully) shown our commitment too. We didn't change our name from Telligent to Zimbra because it would carry weight in the forums market. We changed the name from Telligent to Zimbra because we wanted the Zimbra market to know how important the Zimbra product was to us.
That said, our forums product is used by 1,000s of companies for technical (https://community.rackspace.com), marketing (http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/) and governments (https://www.apan.org). We did a terrible job of rolling it out for ourselves though - but we are working through the feedback.
Zimbra Collaboration is a phenomenal product and one that we have (hopefully) shown our commitment too. We didn't change our name from Telligent to Zimbra because it would carry weight in the forums market. We changed the name from Telligent to Zimbra because we wanted the Zimbra market to know how important the Zimbra product was to us.
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
Phenomenal ? Well, phenomenally unusable ... the old forum was MUCH better for that purpose.
Yes, it didn't have all that fancy eye-candy, like animated font resizing on scrolling, etc.
But it DID WORK, and it DID NOT have so much optical noise.
Oh, and if ZCS is so important for you: when will the source tree ever compile (w/o patching) ?
For current mainline, I've got about 40 patches to make it compile.
Ah, and why do all my bug reports and patch contributions in bugzilla constantly get rejected ?
To me (and considering whats going on in bugzilla), it *REALLY* looks like there's NO intention
whatsoever to form an real opensource community - that's just an alibi.
Yes, it didn't have all that fancy eye-candy, like animated font resizing on scrolling, etc.
But it DID WORK, and it DID NOT have so much optical noise.
Oh, and if ZCS is so important for you: when will the source tree ever compile (w/o patching) ?
For current mainline, I've got about 40 patches to make it compile.
Ah, and why do all my bug reports and patch contributions in bugzilla constantly get rejected ?
To me (and considering whats going on in bugzilla), it *REALLY* looks like there's NO intention
whatsoever to form an real opensource community - that's just an alibi.
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
The animated font size on scrolling - it's because this website is responsive/adaptive. So depending on the screen size you'll get a different interaction. We're going to cut back on the unnecessary bells-and-whistles. Starting this week we're meeting daily to prioritize what gets addressed and how.
I can't comment on the source tree compiling. I'll have to defer to someone like Quanah to address that. Patch contributions is something that we want to enable.
I can't comment on the source tree compiling. I'll have to defer to someone like Quanah to address that. Patch contributions is something that we want to enable.
Zimba should be the main focus of the community pages
[QUOTE]
The animated font size on scrolling - it's because this website is responsive/adaptive. So depending on the screen size you'll get a different interaction.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about window resizing. But resizing of the breadcrumb when scrolling: first it is bug, but when scrolling down it gets smaller.
Such things are pretty annoying. And that's just one example of many.
[QUOTE]
I can't comment on the source tree compiling. I'll have to defer to someone like Quanah to address that.
[/QUOTE]
Quite pointless. That's exactly the guy I had my fights with - for YEARS now. Just have a closer look at bugzilla.
He's simply rejecting the issues w/ silly excuses, denying that there are problems at all.
OTOH, he regularily commits broken changes, leaving the source tree in a completely unusable state.
But he's not the only one - regularily committing broken stuff seems to be common practice in your company.
And there even is no such thing as a stable baseline or tags on exact trees for certain releases (at least none
publically visible)
Quite funny: with the latest mvn transition his argumentation against distro packages (yes, he really likes
to rant against certain distros) is completely defeated. Now, the build is really non-reproducable.
It just downloads dozens of binaries from untrusted sources, in unspecified versions. Using the really
outdated company-internal CPAN mirror was bad enough (hat to do lots of bugfixing to get it built
w/ public CPAN mirrors), but now the situation got even _worse_. And yes, again, the mvn build files
are incomplete and broken.
I really wonder how you actually build that thing. Do you have an CI ? It must be on red alert all the day ...
[QUOTE]
Patch contributions is something that we want to enable.
[/QUOTE]
There's not much to "enable" here. I've already pushed my changes to gitorious - you could just
taken them from there - if you only WANTED to. But from what's happing in bugzilla, I've clearly
got the impression, that community input is NOT WANTED at all. And it also seems that even
other people being able to build it on their own is NOT WANTED, and the whole OSS topic
is nothing but a marketing bluff.
If you _really_ wanted to do some opensource project, you should start with actually listening
to people out there instead of simply denying their issues completely.
And, of course, you'll need to get your messy SCM in order.
We all know that P4 was never made for open collaboration in software development - it's
nothing but a versioned fileserver (w/ pretty bad interfaces), nothing that you would expect
from a decent SCM. As long as you stick with it, you'll always waste your time w/ working
around bad design and lack of robustness.
The animated font size on scrolling - it's because this website is responsive/adaptive. So depending on the screen size you'll get a different interaction.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not talking about window resizing. But resizing of the breadcrumb when scrolling: first it is bug, but when scrolling down it gets smaller.
Such things are pretty annoying. And that's just one example of many.
[QUOTE]
I can't comment on the source tree compiling. I'll have to defer to someone like Quanah to address that.
[/QUOTE]
Quite pointless. That's exactly the guy I had my fights with - for YEARS now. Just have a closer look at bugzilla.
He's simply rejecting the issues w/ silly excuses, denying that there are problems at all.
OTOH, he regularily commits broken changes, leaving the source tree in a completely unusable state.
But he's not the only one - regularily committing broken stuff seems to be common practice in your company.
And there even is no such thing as a stable baseline or tags on exact trees for certain releases (at least none
publically visible)
Quite funny: with the latest mvn transition his argumentation against distro packages (yes, he really likes
to rant against certain distros) is completely defeated. Now, the build is really non-reproducable.
It just downloads dozens of binaries from untrusted sources, in unspecified versions. Using the really
outdated company-internal CPAN mirror was bad enough (hat to do lots of bugfixing to get it built
w/ public CPAN mirrors), but now the situation got even _worse_. And yes, again, the mvn build files
are incomplete and broken.
I really wonder how you actually build that thing. Do you have an CI ? It must be on red alert all the day ...
[QUOTE]
Patch contributions is something that we want to enable.
[/QUOTE]
There's not much to "enable" here. I've already pushed my changes to gitorious - you could just
taken them from there - if you only WANTED to. But from what's happing in bugzilla, I've clearly
got the impression, that community input is NOT WANTED at all. And it also seems that even
other people being able to build it on their own is NOT WANTED, and the whole OSS topic
is nothing but a marketing bluff.
If you _really_ wanted to do some opensource project, you should start with actually listening
to people out there instead of simply denying their issues completely.
And, of course, you'll need to get your messy SCM in order.
We all know that P4 was never made for open collaboration in software development - it's
nothing but a versioned fileserver (w/ pretty bad interfaces), nothing that you would expect
from a decent SCM. As long as you stick with it, you'll always waste your time w/ working
around bad design and lack of robustness.