[dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.

Pierre-Emmanuel Manteau - DoYouSoft pemanteau at doyousoft.com
Thu Oct 11 07:03:37 EDT 2012


About The book idea,

Why not create a github repository : Dojo 2.0 : The Living Guide

the readme would be the index
a folder per chapter

People could do pull requests to add/modify/improve/add examples on 
pages/chapters
It would also make the task maybe lighter to write the complete book, 
make it a community project, it would also help keep it up to date to 
some extend.
We could then use some github page system to use the documents we write 
directly from the repo and have a dojo2.github.com guide book.
People could of course freely print a copy by themselves or buy one from 
Dojo Foundation with some extra (t-shirt, or whatever).

each page could be a number.md file

well it is just a proposal, but I think it'd be really cool :)
Not a doc ! a book ! :)

PEM-


Le 11/10/2012 12:51, Dylan Schiemann a écrit :
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Very interesting points Ken, and I agree with much of what you are saying.
>
> For me, 2.0 isn't done until we have 2-3 well documented, beautifully
> architected representative example applications. Otherwise, we don't
> know if our toolkit is useful and practical, and efficient to use.
>
> Regarding books, a good book on Dojo would take 2000 hours in my
> estimate. I've gone as far as writing an outline, that for the first
> third of the book or so could mostly leverage existing content and clean
> it up. I'm thinking if there's enough interest in that, I could get that
> first third of it done, go the self-publish route, and use the proceeds
> to fund efforts to write the next 2/3rds... that said, writing books
> that aren't littered with errors, that are simple to understand, takes
> an inordinate amount of time, so that's why no one has stepped up.
>
> Lots more in here, and from PEM's email to respond to, but I'm out of
> time for now...
>
> Regards,
> - -Dylan
>
> on 10/11/12 2:18 AM (GMT-07:00) Ken Benjamin said the following:
>> I agree, we are not "at war" with any other toolkit, nor should we be
>> but that does not mean that we are not competing.
>>
>>   
>>
>> One of the comments mentioned that we might "not have the resources" to
>> rework parts of the toolkit. Those resources come from having a broad
>> user base and the shortage of those resources are the harbinger of
>> future decline into irrelevance or narrow adoption by only those
>> organizations with the resources to actively support the toolkit. Not
>> knowing the full Dojo contributor landscape, I'm speculating here that
>> we are already dependent upon a few very committed large supporters,
>> predominantly IBM.
>>
>>   
>>
>> In some sense this a huge plus and adds needed continuity and stability.
>> It also comes at a price. Large organizations tend to be interested in
>> large customers. This is particularly in the case of IBM whose focus is
>> on large organizations exclusively. Here's why this matters:
>>
>>   
>>
>> The web is a dynamic place with incredibly low barriers to entry for
>> content and application creation. Anyone can pick up a book on HTML and
>> make something out of it. Some of these people will advance in their
>> skills, creating more complex apps, working for small companies to
>> implement new websites and apps, and just a few of those may develop
>> professional programming skills and move into the large corporations.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Dojo, as it stands today, attracts that last, limited set of people:
>> those who know what is involved in creating a complex app, want a
>> comprehensive solution, understand at least a little about software
>> lifecycle, are concerned about on-going support, and take licensing into
>> consideration.
>>
>>   
>>
>> If I'm a newbie to the whole Web 2.0 app development world, what toolkit
>> would I choose? The answer today is clearly jQuery. Why? It looks nice
>> (yes, this really does make a huge difference), is easy to get started
>> with, has lots users, and lots of documentation.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Where will I turn years later when I have more skills and have a new
>> project? Back to my old friend, jQuery, tried and true.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Dojo is, in fact, in competition with jQuery and all the rest. We cannot
>> overlook that fact, though we can treat it as coop-etition to some
>> degree. Open-source does not comport well with cut-throat.
>>
>>   
>>
>> I would like to see Dojo move to position itself as more accessible to
>> beginners while providing a solid pathway to their growth into more
>> sophisticated apps and methods, all of which Dojo currently facilitates.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Right now, our job is hard. We have to convert people from the
>> simplicity and prettiness of jQuery to the relative complexity and
>> richness of Dojo. I'd rather we could be the natural first step up from
>> HTML. Declarative markup with auto-require is that easy step. Add some
>> animation, better theming tools, and simple tutorials and we're there.
>>
>>   
>>
>> The tools are there. We can do everything jQuery can do, and much more,
>> but we don't make it simple. We assume people understand object-oriented
>> Javascript (mostly they don't). We make Dojo for the professional
>> programmer, not the budding script kiddie that Joe's Diner hired to
>> build their website. I don't see why we can't capture both sets.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Appeal to the beginners and enable the experts. Provide an on-ramp to
>> Web 2.0 (and Web 3.0, whatever that means) that leads directly to the
>> super-highway that is Dojo. Add some signs so people don't just happen
>> to take the scenic jQuery Parkway because it was the only on-ramp they
>> saw and the scenery was nice, even if the destination wasn't where they
>> might have ultimately wanted to go.
>>
>>   
>>
>> One last point here. We must remember what we are building. Tools. Tools
>> have no purpose other than to help create something useful. It is what
>> we can build with the toolkit that matters and we can't forget that in
>> our lust to forge a better hammer.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Forget the technology. Focus on answering this question:
>>
>>   
>>
>> How does Dojo make my life better?
>>
>> In other words, what is the benefit to me. Tools are just the how. I
>> want to know what you are going to give me. Why Dojo?
>>
>>   
>>
>> To my mind Dojo offers:
>>
>>   
>>
>> The ability to create both simple and complex applications
>>
>> A single source for all (or nearly all) the parts I might need
>>
>> A single learning curve (entirely too steep at the moment but getting
>> better)
>>
>> Simple methods to start (declarative) and all the power I might need
>> (programmatic / dojo libs)
>>
>> A robust and helpful support community (but we need books)
>>
>> A well-integrated API with tools that all work together
>>
>> The ability to easily make small, or large changes to any of the tools
>> to better meet my needs
>>
>> Compatibility with other (AMD) tools if I they better suit my needs
>>
>> Stability that comes from backing by big names, like IBM
>>
>> A builder that shrinks my app from BIG and SLOW loading to tiny and fast
>>
>>   
>>
>> What is currently missing:
>>
>>   
>>
>> Easy (I mean really easy) getting started with Dojo guides, both
>> programmatic using dojo/query, animation, stuff you might want on a
>> webpage, not in an app.
>>
>> Better examples / easier to read docs for Build
>>
>> ThemeRoller, or equivalent and some designer created styles to go with it.
>>
>> Dojo book(s) - why isn't someone writing (re-writing) one for the AMD
>> 1.x line? I suspect it'll be around for years to come (no, I'm not
>> volunteering).
>>
>>   
>>
>> First impressions matter and Dojo is intimidating for the beginner, not
>> particularly beautiful (Mobile is an exception and very nice, Claro is
>> highly functional and attractive in a 2003 kind of way). Show me what I
>> can build with Dojo. Have a showcase (in addition to what we have
>> already) with at least screenshots of what I can make using Dojo.
>> Inspire me with ideas.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Oh, and what about a "Developed with Dojo" icon / link / tagline people
>> can use, if they want.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Dojo should continue to be what Dojo has always been. It's raison d'être
>> remains to help you build high quality, useful web applications in the
>> most efficient manner possible.
>>
>>   
>>
>> One toolkit to rule them all has a lot of appeal, so long as it does it
>> well, and continues to be open-minded and accepting of new ideas. Dojo
>> has the potential to be all that.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Ken B
>>
>>   
>>
>>   
>>
>>   
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org>
>> [mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org>] On Behalf Of
>> Dylan Schiemann
>> Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2012 6:04 AM
>> To: dojo dev.
>> Subject: Re: [dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.
>>
>>   
>>
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>
>>
>> Frankly, I don't care at all about competing with other toolkits. I'm
>> tired of hearing about how we can win the war. Why are we at war, rather
>> than working hard to grow with the community at large?
>>
>>
>>
>> Rather than focusing on building the one walled garden yet completely
>> open toolkit to rule them all, Dojo and the Dojo Foundation should be
>> thinking about how we can take our knowledge and make both our toolkit
>> and any others that share our open ideals better.
>>
>>
>>
>> What I personally care about is creating a collection of tools (a
>>
>> toolkit) that continues to make it simpler to build well architected and
>> highly performant apps, and that is easy to split up and scale up.
>>
>>
>>
>> The focus needs to be on the APIs and tools and features that we need to
>> deliver on, and growing our community by becoming part of the bigger
>> community. We didn't start Dojo to win the war, we started Dojo to
>> change the web and make it more open and collaborative.
>>
>>
>>
>> We need to focus on building an amazing foundation, pushing things
>> forward, and people will continue to notice. We've had a lot more
>> interest lately as people take another look at Dojo, and interesting
>> group of new people that have become involved, or that want to see where
>>
>> 2.0 goes to see how they can help.
>>
>>
>>
>> One idea I've had involves sort of having the foundation be a bit less
>> about silo-ed projects, and more about areas of interest that one or
>> more projects can come together to collaborate on.
>>
>>
>>
>> For example, this might look something like:
>>
>>
>>
>> * Utilities
>>
>> * Modules
>>
>> * Language improvements and shims
>>
>> * UI (widgets, themes, mobile, effects, vector graphics, etc. ... this
>> one is probably too big)
>>
>> * Data/MVC
>>
>> * Server-side integration/REST/Real-time
>>
>>
>>
>> with the idea being to encourage projects with overlap to more easily
>> collaborate across projects where it makes sense. People could either be
>> involved with projects, or just involved in an area of interest, or
>> both. It might make the foundation a more inviting place to encourage
>> collaboration, etc.? But more importantly I think, it would encourage
>> projects to perhaps share some common APIs, so that each microtoolkit
>> isn't reinventing the wheel.
>>
>>
>>
>> The goal for Dojo 2.0 should not be to try and take on the weight of the
>> world and do everything, but should be to provide the right set of tools
>> and community and vision so that our users can do everything with Dojo
>> as part of that story.
>>
>>
>>
>> Until we have that, I don't care about the competition, because it
>> frankly doesn't matter and it's the wrong place to put the attention of
>> an open source project as we're trying to plan towards 2.0.
>>
>>
>>
>> Looking at the various suggestions, those from Colin, Rick Waldron, &
>> James Burke mesh most closely with what I think our priorities should be
>> for 2.x, as well as what I wrote of course.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> -Dylan
>>
>>
>>
>> on 10/10/12 8:39 PM (GMT-07:00) Rawld Gill said the following:
>>
>>> Great point on packaging/distribution.
>>
>>
>>> I think the issue of *how* we release is yet another key view slice
>> through what we are trying to accomplish. We did discuss this a little
>> today, including the idea that one of our release artifacts in the
>> future could be a single-script, loaderless package that could compete
>> with the microlibs/jquery.
>>
>>
>>
>>> --Rawld
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org> [mailto:dojo-
>> <mailto:dojo->
>>
>>>> contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:contributors-bounces at mail.dojotoolkit.org>] On Behalf Of Adam L.
>>
>>>> Peller
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 6:56 PM
>>>> To: dojo dev.
>>>> Subject: Re: [dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.
>>>> Sorry I missed the meeting.
>>>> I don't like the odds of predicting what the right areas are to focus
>>>> on.  My hope for Dojo 2.0 is that we can fix the
>>>> packaging/distribution problem in a way that makes us more flexible,
>>>> so we don't get stuck with one release of one set of plugins, or tie
>>>> our future to decisions we make now.  Instead, we can have
>>>> independent pieces with independent release cycles, which can thrive
>>>> or die, people can use what they need, can do a major revision (3.0)
>>>> when they need to, work with other toolkits, etc. That's an
>>>> oversimplification of a very difficult problem, but we're in a much
>>>> better position to do this now with AMD, github, volo/cpm, etc., and
>> getting that right may matter more than what we initially release for 2.0.
>>
>>>> -Adam
>>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> dojo-contributors mailing list
>>> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org>
>>
>>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> dojo-contributors mailing list
>>
>> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> <mailto:dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org>
>>
>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dojo-contributors mailing list
>> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlB2pKYACgkQ1E2HcBNypM6rxwCfbvk7L8yljc2NPoc5JjiLLAH8
> 7HAAoI66Jb3whGdOLa8gBfMD0AdzaJEH
> =b74c
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors



More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list